https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108450 The Bombay HC held that transfer of the suit to the Debts Recovery Tribunal did not oust its jurisdiction to enforce obligations arising from an agency agreement executed in proceedings before it. The dispute concerned the erstwhile Court Receiver's agent's contractual and statutory liabilities, including the covenant to discharge liabilities, furnish periodic nil liability certificates, and comply with an express undertaking given through its constituted attorney. Because the agent remained answerable for breach of those terms, the Court enforced the undertaking and granted the directions sought. en-us Tue, 25 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Mar 2012 16:11:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108450 The Bombay HC held that transfer of the suit to the Debts Recovery Tribunal did not oust its jurisdiction to enforce obligations arising from an agency agreement executed in proceedings before it. The dispute concerned the erstwhile Court Receiver's agent's contractual and statutory liabilities, including the covenant to discharge liabilities, furnish periodic nil liability certificates, and comply with an express undertaking given through its constituted attorney. Because the agent remained answerable for breach of those terms, the Court enforced the undertaking and granted the directions sought. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 25 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108450