https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98876 The court ruled in favor of Kanhiya Lal regarding the validity of the assignment of pronotes for consideration, as the deposit was undisputed, and consideration was established. The decree obtained by Kanhiya Lal was not set aside for fraud, as no evidence of fraudulent preference was found in the assignment of pronotes. The petition failed against a specific respondent due to lack of relief sought, and insufficient particulars of fraud led to the dismissal of the petition without costs. en-us Thu, 22 Jul 1971 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Jan 2012 13:27:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98876 The court ruled in favor of Kanhiya Lal regarding the validity of the assignment of pronotes for consideration, as the deposit was undisputed, and consideration was established. The decree obtained by Kanhiya Lal was not set aside for fraud, as no evidence of fraudulent preference was found in the assignment of pronotes. The petition failed against a specific respondent due to lack of relief sought, and insufficient particulars of fraud led to the dismissal of the petition without costs. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 22 Jul 1971 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98876