<?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>2010 (9) TMI 225 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113193</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court upheld the High Court&#039;s decision regarding the forfeiture of earnest money in a tender dispute. The Court found that the correction made by the petitioner in the tender offer constituted a revocation of the original offer, justifying the respondent&#039;s right to forfeit the earnest money as per the tender conditions. The judgment relied on established legal principles stating that earnest money is forfeited if a deal fails due to the fault of the offering party. Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition, affirming the forfeiture of earnest money by the respondent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Aug 2013 13:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150209" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (9) TMI 225 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113193</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court upheld the High Court&#039;s decision regarding the forfeiture of earnest money in a tender dispute. The Court found that the correction made by the petitioner in the tender offer constituted a revocation of the original offer, justifying the respondent&#039;s right to forfeit the earnest money as per the tender conditions. The judgment relied on established legal principles stating that earnest money is forfeited if a deal fails due to the fault of the offering party. Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition, affirming the forfeiture of earnest money by the respondent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113193</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>