<?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>1979 (9) TMI 149 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99752</link>
    <description>The court denied the company&#039;s plea to set aside the auction sale by discharging its debt to the bank, citing inapplicability of relevant provisions. However, the court recognized the principle that auction sales aim to realize payment for creditors, allowing for potential intervention under specific circumstances. Regarding the confirmation of the auction sale, the court imposed conditions on the purchaser to pay an additional amount, reflecting the property&#039;s market value discrepancies. The court directed the purchaser to deposit the extra sum within a specified period, with consequences outlined for compliance or withdrawal. The court concluded the matter, leaving parties to bear their costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Sep 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 10:39:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136804" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (9) TMI 149 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99752</link>
      <description>The court denied the company&#039;s plea to set aside the auction sale by discharging its debt to the bank, citing inapplicability of relevant provisions. However, the court recognized the principle that auction sales aim to realize payment for creditors, allowing for potential intervention under specific circumstances. Regarding the confirmation of the auction sale, the court imposed conditions on the purchaser to pay an additional amount, reflecting the property&#039;s market value discrepancies. The court directed the purchaser to deposit the extra sum within a specified period, with consequences outlined for compliance or withdrawal. The court concluded the matter, leaving parties to bear their costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Sep 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99752</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>