<?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>2004 (9) TMI 398 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110585</link>
    <description>In liquidation, the Official Liquidator cannot be compelled at a purchaser&#039;s instance to pay arrears of property tax and electricity dues from sale proceeds contrary to the statutory distribution scheme under the Companies Act. A sale on an as-is-where-is basis does not permit the purchaser to fasten such liabilities on the liquidation estate merely because the assets were sold during winding-up. Any enforceable covenant relating to clearance of dues lies, if at all, against the secured creditor or other party that executed the sale deed. The request to direct payment from the sale proceeds was rejected, leaving the purchaser to pursue any contractual remedies separately.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 16:05:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=147601" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (9) TMI 398 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110585</link>
      <description>In liquidation, the Official Liquidator cannot be compelled at a purchaser&#039;s instance to pay arrears of property tax and electricity dues from sale proceeds contrary to the statutory distribution scheme under the Companies Act. A sale on an as-is-where-is basis does not permit the purchaser to fasten such liabilities on the liquidation estate merely because the assets were sold during winding-up. Any enforceable covenant relating to clearance of dues lies, if at all, against the secured creditor or other party that executed the sale deed. The request to direct payment from the sale proceeds was rejected, leaving the purchaser to pursue any contractual remedies separately.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110585</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>