<?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>2013 (4) TMI 335 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=222139</link>
    <description>Section 543(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 requires the Official Liquidator to plead and prove how the directors&#039; wrongful conduct caused actual loss before a civil misfeasance claim can succeed. Mere non-handing over of share certificates or other investments is not enough where the record shows the ex-directors had explained the position in correspondence, stated that some national savings certificates were with the Sales Tax Department as security, and indicated that remaining share certificates could be handed over on instructions. In the absence of contemporaneous objection, demand, or proof of financial loss, the ingredients of misfeasance and breach of trust were not established.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:32:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=195488" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (4) TMI 335 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=222139</link>
      <description>Section 543(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 requires the Official Liquidator to plead and prove how the directors&#039; wrongful conduct caused actual loss before a civil misfeasance claim can succeed. Mere non-handing over of share certificates or other investments is not enough where the record shows the ex-directors had explained the position in correspondence, stated that some national savings certificates were with the Sales Tax Department as security, and indicated that remaining share certificates could be handed over on instructions. In the absence of contemporaneous objection, demand, or proof of financial loss, the ingredients of misfeasance and breach of trust were not established.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=222139</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>