<?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 (11) TMI 347 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109492</link>
    <description>Liability under linked chit transactions is determined by the contractual records, payment proof, and the adjustment of cross-claims. For Chit No. 18, the participant&#039;s claim of 38 monthly subscriptions was rejected because receipts and records supported only 31 payments, so the balance remained due. For Chit No. 46, the agreement and bye-laws allowed removal of a defaulting member and refund only of the amount actually paid after deducting 5% as damages; the termination notice fixed the reduced entitlement. The amounts under both chits could be adjusted against each other, leaving only the net balance recoverable with interest, and the security remained enforceable if payment was not made.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2012 14:52:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=146509" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (11) TMI 347 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109492</link>
      <description>Liability under linked chit transactions is determined by the contractual records, payment proof, and the adjustment of cross-claims. For Chit No. 18, the participant&#039;s claim of 38 monthly subscriptions was rejected because receipts and records supported only 31 payments, so the balance remained due. For Chit No. 46, the agreement and bye-laws allowed removal of a defaulting member and refund only of the amount actually paid after deducting 5% as damages; the termination notice fixed the reduced entitlement. The amounts under both chits could be adjusted against each other, leaving only the net balance recoverable with interest, and the security remained enforceable if payment was not made.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109492</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>