<?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>2015 (7) TMI 1251 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196105</link>
    <description>Where a Section 17 application was already pending before the DRT and notice had been fixed after the scheduled auction, the Court protected the statutory remedy by directing expeditious disposal of the application. It also restrained the secured creditors from confirming the auction until the Tribunal decided the matter, so that the remedy would not become ineffective before adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 Nov 2017 06:33:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=496710" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (7) TMI 1251 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196105</link>
      <description>Where a Section 17 application was already pending before the DRT and notice had been fixed after the scheduled auction, the Court protected the statutory remedy by directing expeditious disposal of the application. It also restrained the secured creditors from confirming the auction until the Tribunal decided the matter, so that the remedy would not become ineffective before adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196105</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>