<?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>2008 (1) TMI 615 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112065</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the applications seeking interim injunctions, setting aside the sale of property, and impleading petitioners as respondents. The court vacated the interim injunction granted and highlighted the limited scope of Section 237 of the Companies Act, 1956, emphasizing proper authorization in company transactions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2014 13:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149081" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (1) TMI 615 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112065</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the applications seeking interim injunctions, setting aside the sale of property, and impleading petitioners as respondents. The court vacated the interim injunction granted and highlighted the limited scope of Section 237 of the Companies Act, 1956, emphasizing proper authorization in company transactions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112065</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>