<?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>2011 (6) TMI 939 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197518</link>
    <description>Interim equitable relief may be refused where the applicant cannot show valid corporate authorisation, a subsisting contractual entitlement, and full candour. The Delhi High Court noted that a board resolution supported by short notice, no circulated agenda, and no proved quorum was prima facie insufficient to authorise the proceedings. It further found that the applicant had prima facie abandoned the contractual arrangement and breached its obligations by not taking meaningful steps to preserve or perform it. Suppression of a central communication on the applicant&#039;s own inability to proceed also weighed against relief, and the Court declined interim protection on equitable grounds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Jan 2018 13:01:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=503710" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (6) TMI 939 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197518</link>
      <description>Interim equitable relief may be refused where the applicant cannot show valid corporate authorisation, a subsisting contractual entitlement, and full candour. The Delhi High Court noted that a board resolution supported by short notice, no circulated agenda, and no proved quorum was prima facie insufficient to authorise the proceedings. It further found that the applicant had prima facie abandoned the contractual arrangement and breached its obligations by not taking meaningful steps to preserve or perform it. Suppression of a central communication on the applicant&#039;s own inability to proceed also weighed against relief, and the Court declined interim protection on equitable grounds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197518</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>