<?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>2001 (7) TMI 1216 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106737</link>
    <description>Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 does not bar a landlord&#039;s suit for possession against a tenant company merely because the tenant is sick industrial company. The protection applies to proceedings that would affect the company&#039;s working or finances in the relevant sense, not to eviction claims or the landlord&#039;s right to recover possession without being compelled to allow continued occupation without payment. A combined claim for possession, arrears of rent, and future mesne profits is also not treated as a suit for recovery of money for section 22 purposes, so a stay was refused.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2012 14:37:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=143757" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (7) TMI 1216 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106737</link>
      <description>Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 does not bar a landlord&#039;s suit for possession against a tenant company merely because the tenant is sick industrial company. The protection applies to proceedings that would affect the company&#039;s working or finances in the relevant sense, not to eviction claims or the landlord&#039;s right to recover possession without being compelled to allow continued occupation without payment. A combined claim for possession, arrears of rent, and future mesne profits is also not treated as a suit for recovery of money for section 22 purposes, so a stay was refused.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106737</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>