<?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>2000 (8) TMI 1038 - WEST BENGAL STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106111</link>
    <description>A banking customer who used the bank as an intermediary to transmit payment for proposed share purchase was treated as a consumer in relation to that banking service. Because the cheque amount was encashed but not transmitted so as to result in share allotment, refund from the bank was held payable with interest from the date of encashment until payment. Relief against the company on share allotment was not granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2013 16:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=143146" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (8) TMI 1038 - WEST BENGAL STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106111</link>
      <description>A banking customer who used the bank as an intermediary to transmit payment for proposed share purchase was treated as a consumer in relation to that banking service. Because the cheque amount was encashed but not transmitted so as to result in share allotment, refund from the bank was held payable with interest from the date of encashment until payment. Relief against the company on share allotment was not granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106111</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>