<?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>1994 (11) TMI 309 - A.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102642</link>
    <description>The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission modified the District Forum&#039;s decision, directing the company to pay Rs. 1,000 as compensation to the complainant for the delayed transfer of shares. The Commission upheld the costs awarded and found the company responsible for the delay, reducing the compensation amount based on the face value of the shares. The company was instructed to make the payment within one month.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Nov 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2013 16:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139688" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (11) TMI 309 - A.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102642</link>
      <description>The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission modified the District Forum&#039;s decision, directing the company to pay Rs. 1,000 as compensation to the complainant for the delayed transfer of shares. The Commission upheld the costs awarded and found the company responsible for the delay, reducing the compensation amount based on the face value of the shares. The company was instructed to make the payment within one month.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Nov 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102642</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>