<?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>2005 (12) TMI 289 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111045</link>
    <description>The High Court set aside the Company Law Board&#039;s order and directed a fresh consideration of the dispute, emphasizing the importance of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated March 11, 1995. The Court instructed the Board to reevaluate the case, taking into account the terms of the MoU and other relevant transactions. Both parties&#039; arguments were to be reconsidered, with a directive for an expedited decision by June 30, 2006.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 10:23:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148061" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (12) TMI 289 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111045</link>
      <description>The High Court set aside the Company Law Board&#039;s order and directed a fresh consideration of the dispute, emphasizing the importance of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated March 11, 1995. The Court instructed the Board to reevaluate the case, taking into account the terms of the MoU and other relevant transactions. Both parties&#039; arguments were to be reconsidered, with a directive for an expedited decision by June 30, 2006.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111045</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>