<?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>1980 (7) TMI 184 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99919</link>
    <description>Sections 3 and 4 of the Kerala Relief Undertakings (Special Provisions) Act, 1961 were treated as constitutionally valid because, in pith and substance, the law operated as a temporary measure for prevention of unemployment and unemployment relief. The suspension of liabilities and remedies against notified relief undertakings was held to be incidental to that object and not repugnant to the Companies Act, 1956 or the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951, particularly where the suspended liability was not a subsisting enforceable debt during the notified period. The classification was also found to bear a rational nexus with the public purpose of relief, so no violation of Articles 14 or 19 was made out; winding-up proceedings could not proceed while the statutory suspension remained in force.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136971" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (7) TMI 184 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99919</link>
      <description>Sections 3 and 4 of the Kerala Relief Undertakings (Special Provisions) Act, 1961 were treated as constitutionally valid because, in pith and substance, the law operated as a temporary measure for prevention of unemployment and unemployment relief. The suspension of liabilities and remedies against notified relief undertakings was held to be incidental to that object and not repugnant to the Companies Act, 1956 or the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951, particularly where the suspended liability was not a subsisting enforceable debt during the notified period. The classification was also found to bear a rational nexus with the public purpose of relief, so no violation of Articles 14 or 19 was made out; winding-up proceedings could not proceed while the statutory suspension remained in force.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99919</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>