<?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>2002 (9) TMI 561 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106493</link>
    <description>The court determined that the respondent owed Rs. 13,56,952 to the petitioner for supplies made between 1995 and 1997. The respondent was directed to deposit this amount with the court. The court invoked Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, presuming the cheques issued were for debt discharge. The court deferred appointing a provisional liquidator but noted the respondent&#039;s approach to the BIFR. The case was scheduled for further review in December 2002 to assess progress and determine next steps.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2012 14:19:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=143515" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (9) TMI 561 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106493</link>
      <description>The court determined that the respondent owed Rs. 13,56,952 to the petitioner for supplies made between 1995 and 1997. The respondent was directed to deposit this amount with the court. The court invoked Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, presuming the cheques issued were for debt discharge. The court deferred appointing a provisional liquidator but noted the respondent&#039;s approach to the BIFR. The case was scheduled for further review in December 2002 to assess progress and determine next steps.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106493</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>