<?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>2017 (7) TMI 504 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345392</link>
    <description>A representative suit under Order 1 Rule 8 CPC is maintainable only where the represented persons share a real common interest in the right asserted, the grievance complained of, and the relief sought, not merely similar issues or overlapping facts. The Explanation does not require the same cause of action, but the class must still be genuinely common. Where shareholders of different companies are affected differently, and the relief sought would not benefit all members alike, joinder or impleadment is the proper course. On that basis, the requirements of Order 1 Rule 8 were not met and the leave earlier granted was rightly revoked.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Jul 2017 09:48:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=481506" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 504 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345392</link>
      <description>A representative suit under Order 1 Rule 8 CPC is maintainable only where the represented persons share a real common interest in the right asserted, the grievance complained of, and the relief sought, not merely similar issues or overlapping facts. The Explanation does not require the same cause of action, but the class must still be genuinely common. Where shareholders of different companies are affected differently, and the relief sought would not benefit all members alike, joinder or impleadment is the proper course. On that basis, the requirements of Order 1 Rule 8 were not met and the leave earlier granted was rightly revoked.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345392</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>