<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1947 (12) TMI 7 - IN THE OUDH CHIEF COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96969</link>
    <description>A subscriber to a company&#039;s memorandum incurs liability for the shares entered opposite his name without any further allotment, because subscription itself fastens the obligation for calls. An alleged surrender of shares does not extinguish that liability where it is not supported by lawful reduction-of-capital machinery, and an informal release is void. A call is not invalid merely because the resolution later fixes the time and place of payment, and a winding-up declaration is valid if verified as required by statute. Pre-suit interest on unpaid call money was disallowed because no contractual, statutory, or customary basis for a rate had been established.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 1947 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 14:50:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134027" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1947 (12) TMI 7 - IN THE OUDH CHIEF COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96969</link>
      <description>A subscriber to a company&#039;s memorandum incurs liability for the shares entered opposite his name without any further allotment, because subscription itself fastens the obligation for calls. An alleged surrender of shares does not extinguish that liability where it is not supported by lawful reduction-of-capital machinery, and an informal release is void. A call is not invalid merely because the resolution later fixes the time and place of payment, and a winding-up declaration is valid if verified as required by statute. Pre-suit interest on unpaid call money was disallowed because no contractual, statutory, or customary basis for a rate had been established.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 1947 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96969</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>