<?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>2003 (2) TMI 347 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108438</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the bank&#039;s appeal, affirming that the bank improperly exercised its lien over the fixed deposit and caused reputational harm to the third defendant. The court ordered the bank to return the fixed deposit amount after deducting the loan liability and pay damages for dishonoring the fixed deposit receipt.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Mar 2012 15:13:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=145455" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (2) TMI 347 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108438</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the bank&#039;s appeal, affirming that the bank improperly exercised its lien over the fixed deposit and caused reputational harm to the third defendant. The court ordered the bank to return the fixed deposit amount after deducting the loan liability and pay damages for dishonoring the fixed deposit receipt.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108438</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>