<?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>2007 (11) TMI 682 - COMPANY LAW BOARD, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275704</link>
    <description>The petitioner subscribed to shares but did not pay the consideration. The court found that since the petitioner did not fulfill the payment requirement, the petition under Section 399 was dismissed for not being maintainable. Despite alleging oppression and mismanagement, the petitioner&#039;s failure to pay for the agreed shares led to the dismissal of the petition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Oct 2018 10:16:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=538174" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (11) TMI 682 - COMPANY LAW BOARD, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275704</link>
      <description>The petitioner subscribed to shares but did not pay the consideration. The court found that since the petitioner did not fulfill the payment requirement, the petition under Section 399 was dismissed for not being maintainable. Despite alleging oppression and mismanagement, the petitioner&#039;s failure to pay for the agreed shares led to the dismissal of the petition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275704</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>