<?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>1998 (4) TMI 478 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104606</link>
    <description>In a winding-up petition over an unpaid loan, the court treated the respondent&#039;s objection that the pledged shares should have been sold before the balance debt was demanded as not a bona fide defence. The pledge agreement gave the petitioner a power to sell the shares, but not a mandatory duty to do so, and the respondent had not raised that point in response to the statutory notice, instead undertaking staged payment of the balance. The court therefore required deposit of the claimed amount and directed deposit of the pledged shares, with the petition to stand disposed of on payment and admitted if the deposit was not made.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Feb 2012 17:02:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=141645" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (4) TMI 478 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104606</link>
      <description>In a winding-up petition over an unpaid loan, the court treated the respondent&#039;s objection that the pledged shares should have been sold before the balance debt was demanded as not a bona fide defence. The pledge agreement gave the petitioner a power to sell the shares, but not a mandatory duty to do so, and the respondent had not raised that point in response to the statutory notice, instead undertaking staged payment of the balance. The court therefore required deposit of the claimed amount and directed deposit of the pledged shares, with the petition to stand disposed of on payment and admitted if the deposit was not made.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104606</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>