<?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 (10) TMI 924 - HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109028</link>
    <description>A recovery suit against a company in liquidation was treated as time-barred because limitation had to be computed after excluding the period during which proceedings under the Sick Industrial Companies Act suspended the remedy, and the suit became effective only from the date leave of the winding-up court was granted under the Companies Act. The court also found no enforceable liability against the alleged sureties because the surety bond was executed by individuals in their personal capacities and did not fasten liability on them as entities. The recovery claim therefore failed in full, and no principal sum or interest was recoverable from the defendants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2012 15:06:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=146045" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (10) TMI 924 - HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109028</link>
      <description>A recovery suit against a company in liquidation was treated as time-barred because limitation had to be computed after excluding the period during which proceedings under the Sick Industrial Companies Act suspended the remedy, and the suit became effective only from the date leave of the winding-up court was granted under the Companies Act. The court also found no enforceable liability against the alleged sureties because the surety bond was executed by individuals in their personal capacities and did not fasten liability on them as entities. The recovery claim therefore failed in full, and no principal sum or interest was recoverable from the defendants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109028</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>