<?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 (1) TMI 571 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113655</link>
    <description>The appeals were allowed, setting aside the orders of the Single Judge and the auction sale. The Company Court was directed to proceed with the sale process afresh after proper publication. The auction purchaser was entitled to a refund of the amount paid, including accrued interest. Each party was to bear their own costs, and related petitions were closed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Oct 2014 10:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150661" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (1) TMI 571 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113655</link>
      <description>The appeals were allowed, setting aside the orders of the Single Judge and the auction sale. The Company Court was directed to proceed with the sale process afresh after proper publication. The auction purchaser was entitled to a refund of the amount paid, including accrued interest. Each party was to bear their own costs, and related petitions were closed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113655</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>