<?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>1984 (7) TMI 405 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199518</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioner failed to comply with mandatory requirements, did not prove mala fides by the directors, and misinterpreted the applicability of Article 39. The directors&#039; rejection of the transfer was deemed valid, legal, and proper.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2018 17:43:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=511235" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (7) TMI 405 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199518</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioner failed to comply with mandatory requirements, did not prove mala fides by the directors, and misinterpreted the applicability of Article 39. The directors&#039; rejection of the transfer was deemed valid, legal, and proper.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199518</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>