<?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 (9) TMI 552 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109411</link>
    <description>A secured creditor acting under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 may proceed with sale of mortgaged property after repeated default, and the sale will not be quashed absent proved illegality, arbitrariness, or mala fides. A one-time settlement remains a commercial concession within the Corporation&#039;s discretion and does not create an enforceable right in the borrower. Where the borrower was informed of the sale process, given opportunities to obtain a better offer or make payment, and the property was sold through invitation of bids and negotiated settlement at a better price, no mandamus can issue to compel acceptance of the settlement proposal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2012 17:50:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=146428" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (9) TMI 552 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109411</link>
      <description>A secured creditor acting under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 may proceed with sale of mortgaged property after repeated default, and the sale will not be quashed absent proved illegality, arbitrariness, or mala fides. A one-time settlement remains a commercial concession within the Corporation&#039;s discretion and does not create an enforceable right in the borrower. Where the borrower was informed of the sale process, given opportunities to obtain a better offer or make payment, and the property was sold through invitation of bids and negotiated settlement at a better price, no mandamus can issue to compel acceptance of the settlement proposal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109411</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>