<?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>1948 (9) TMI 6 - NAGPUR HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97002</link>
    <description>The Indian Companies Act, as adapted after partition, did not authorise alteration of a company&#039;s registered office from a province within the Dominion of India to Karachi in Pakistan. The word &quot;province&quot; in section 12(1) had to be read in light of the General Clauses Act, the Constitution Act and the India (Adaptation of Existing Indian Laws) Order, 1947, so that it referred only to provinces within India. Read together, these provisions meant the Act no longer extended to Pakistan, and a transfer of the registered office outside the Dominion fell outside the statutory scheme. The Court therefore had no jurisdiction to confirm the special resolution.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Sep 1948 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 16:15:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134060" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1948 (9) TMI 6 - NAGPUR HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97002</link>
      <description>The Indian Companies Act, as adapted after partition, did not authorise alteration of a company&#039;s registered office from a province within the Dominion of India to Karachi in Pakistan. The word &quot;province&quot; in section 12(1) had to be read in light of the General Clauses Act, the Constitution Act and the India (Adaptation of Existing Indian Laws) Order, 1947, so that it referred only to provinces within India. Read together, these provisions meant the Act no longer extended to Pakistan, and a transfer of the registered office outside the Dominion fell outside the statutory scheme. The Court therefore had no jurisdiction to confirm the special resolution.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Sep 1948 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97002</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>