<?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>1984 (5) TMI 226 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101112</link>
    <description>The court found the meeting held on November 7, 1981, to be valid with proper notice dispatch for call money. However, the meeting on April 21, 1982, was deemed invalid due to shareholders lacking voting rights. Consequently, the board represented by Dr. Vikram Singh was not valid, and Ramesh Inder Singh had no authority to defend the petition on behalf of the company under the Companies Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 May 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 May 2018 14:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138162" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (5) TMI 226 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101112</link>
      <description>The court found the meeting held on November 7, 1981, to be valid with proper notice dispatch for call money. However, the meeting on April 21, 1982, was deemed invalid due to shareholders lacking voting rights. Consequently, the board represented by Dr. Vikram Singh was not valid, and Ramesh Inder Singh had no authority to defend the petition on behalf of the company under the Companies Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 May 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101112</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>