<?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>2016 (5) TMI 983 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328002</link>
    <description>A probate court&#039;s function is confined to verifying the genuineness of the will and, where necessary, protecting the estate through appointment of an administrator pendente lite. It cannot treat a company&#039;s assets or internal business decisions as part of a deceased shareholder&#039;s estate, because the company is a separate juristic entity and management of a proposed acquisition lies with the board of directors under the Companies Act, 2013. On that basis, directions against the company and its chairman, service of notice on a non-party, production of documents and an interim restraint were outside the testamentary court&#039;s jurisdiction, and no injunction could be issued against a stranger to the probate proceeding.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 May 2016 10:33:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=429336" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 983 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328002</link>
      <description>A probate court&#039;s function is confined to verifying the genuineness of the will and, where necessary, protecting the estate through appointment of an administrator pendente lite. It cannot treat a company&#039;s assets or internal business decisions as part of a deceased shareholder&#039;s estate, because the company is a separate juristic entity and management of a proposed acquisition lies with the board of directors under the Companies Act, 2013. On that basis, directions against the company and its chairman, service of notice on a non-party, production of documents and an interim restraint were outside the testamentary court&#039;s jurisdiction, and no injunction could be issued against a stranger to the probate proceeding.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328002</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>