<?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>2012 (4) TMI 234 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212032</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the appeal against the Company Judge&#039;s order, stating that the application raised disputed facts requiring a full trial. The court emphasized that the pending suit in the Ranga Reddy District Court would determine the validity of the share transfer. The dismissal was not based on limitation grounds, but the appellant was given the opportunity to file a fresh application under Section 536(2) if the district court suit is dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2013 11:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=185446" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (4) TMI 234 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212032</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the appeal against the Company Judge&#039;s order, stating that the application raised disputed facts requiring a full trial. The court emphasized that the pending suit in the Ranga Reddy District Court would determine the validity of the share transfer. The dismissal was not based on limitation grounds, but the appellant was given the opportunity to file a fresh application under Section 536(2) if the district court suit is dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212032</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>