<?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 (11) TMI 405 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114029</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the writ petition, ruling that the Securitisation Act would prevail over SICA. The petitioner was permitted to explore alternative remedies under the Securitisation Act, with the option to challenge any future actions, such as taking physical possession, through proper legal channels.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2014 21:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151035" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (11) TMI 405 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114029</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the writ petition, ruling that the Securitisation Act would prevail over SICA. The petitioner was permitted to explore alternative remedies under the Securitisation Act, with the option to challenge any future actions, such as taking physical possession, through proper legal channels.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114029</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>