<?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>2009 (2) TMI 465 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112804</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court affirmed that Section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956 applies to employees, past employees, and their legal heirs. The appellants, who wrongfully withheld company property, were directed to vacate the premises. The Court rejected the argument to stay proceedings due to pending civil suits, emphasizing the need for a swift remedy under Section 630. The appeal was dismissed, reinforcing the broad interpretation of the section to ensure prompt retrieval of company property from unauthorized possessors.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Aug 2022 17:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149820" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (2) TMI 465 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112804</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court affirmed that Section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956 applies to employees, past employees, and their legal heirs. The appellants, who wrongfully withheld company property, were directed to vacate the premises. The Court rejected the argument to stay proceedings due to pending civil suits, emphasizing the need for a swift remedy under Section 630. The appeal was dismissed, reinforcing the broad interpretation of the section to ensure prompt retrieval of company property from unauthorized possessors.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112804</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>