<?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>1957 (1) TMI 51 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275976</link>
    <description>A perpetual injunction under the Specific Relief Act is an equitable remedy that requires an enforceable legal obligation and an actual or threatened invasion of a legal right; a mere apprehension that an inquiry may end adversely is insufficient. The Stock Exchange&#039;s demand that the plaintiffs answer a complaint did not itself create a legal wrong or cause of action. The Exchange rules also imposed a disciplinary duty on its directors to maintain probity and supervise members, so the complaint was not shown to fall outside that power. The fact that the alleged misconduct might also amount to an offence did not prevent the Board from inquiring before any criminal conviction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2018 15:39:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=539424" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1957 (1) TMI 51 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275976</link>
      <description>A perpetual injunction under the Specific Relief Act is an equitable remedy that requires an enforceable legal obligation and an actual or threatened invasion of a legal right; a mere apprehension that an inquiry may end adversely is insufficient. The Stock Exchange&#039;s demand that the plaintiffs answer a complaint did not itself create a legal wrong or cause of action. The Exchange rules also imposed a disciplinary duty on its directors to maintain probity and supervise members, so the complaint was not shown to fall outside that power. The fact that the alleged misconduct might also amount to an offence did not prevent the Board from inquiring before any criminal conviction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275976</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>