<?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>1970 (11) TMI 56 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98796</link>
    <description>An unregistered charge under section 125 of the Companies Act, 1956 was treated as void only against the liquidator and creditors, so interest payments made under a lawful subsisting arrangement before liquidation could not be reopened or recalculated at the original rate. The court also applied the settled test of attachment and permanent beneficial enjoyment to hold that wooden partitions, a pump-set, a hut, a motor-car shed, lights and fans, together with other integrated improvements, formed part of the mortgaged property where the deed covered additions, improvements and accessions. The mortgage security was therefore upheld in the form claimed by the mortgagees.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 10:54:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=135853" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1970 (11) TMI 56 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98796</link>
      <description>An unregistered charge under section 125 of the Companies Act, 1956 was treated as void only against the liquidator and creditors, so interest payments made under a lawful subsisting arrangement before liquidation could not be reopened or recalculated at the original rate. The court also applied the settled test of attachment and permanent beneficial enjoyment to hold that wooden partitions, a pump-set, a hut, a motor-car shed, lights and fans, together with other integrated improvements, formed part of the mortgaged property where the deed covered additions, improvements and accessions. The mortgage security was therefore upheld in the form claimed by the mortgagees.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98796</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>