<?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>1961 (9) TMI 23 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97881</link>
    <description>The note addresses whether unpaid share money from calls made before winding up is recoverable under the summary recovery provision or must be pursued under the balance order mechanism. It concludes that call liabilities created by statutory contribution rules fall within the balance order machinery and not the summary recovery provision, because the statutory scheme and purpose separate contractual debts from all call monies exigible under members&#039; contribution liability. Allowing overlap would generate anomalous consequences for defences, set offs and limitation and contradict legislative design; accordingly the summary procedure is not available for pre winding call monies and the balance order remedy applies.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 14:38:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134938" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1961 (9) TMI 23 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97881</link>
      <description>The note addresses whether unpaid share money from calls made before winding up is recoverable under the summary recovery provision or must be pursued under the balance order mechanism. It concludes that call liabilities created by statutory contribution rules fall within the balance order machinery and not the summary recovery provision, because the statutory scheme and purpose separate contractual debts from all call monies exigible under members&#039; contribution liability. Allowing overlap would generate anomalous consequences for defences, set offs and limitation and contradict legislative design; accordingly the summary procedure is not available for pre winding call monies and the balance order remedy applies.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97881</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>