<?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>1995 (3) TMI 385 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103250</link>
    <description>Section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956 provides a special summary remedy against a present or former employee who wrongfully withholds company premises after cessation of service, and that remedy is not displaced by tenancy claims under the Bombay Rent Act where the occupation originated in employment. Wrongful retention of company property after termination is treated as a continuing offence, so limitation runs while the withholding continues under section 472 of the CrPC. On that reasoning, the acquittal was reversed, conviction under section 630 was sustained, and delivery of possession with consequential penal directions was ordered.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sun, 26 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2012 17:46:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=140290" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (3) TMI 385 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103250</link>
      <description>Section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956 provides a special summary remedy against a present or former employee who wrongfully withholds company premises after cessation of service, and that remedy is not displaced by tenancy claims under the Bombay Rent Act where the occupation originated in employment. Wrongful retention of company property after termination is treated as a continuing offence, so limitation runs while the withholding continues under section 472 of the CrPC. On that reasoning, the acquittal was reversed, conviction under section 630 was sustained, and delivery of possession with consequential penal directions was ordered.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Sun, 26 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103250</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>