<?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>1937 (10) TMI 9 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276442</link>
    <description>A bona fide family settlement resolving a genuine dispute was held enforceable without separate consideration, and the writing was capable of operating as an assignment of the beneficial interest in the deposited money under the Transfer of Property Act. On limitation, the claim was treated as one to recover money standing to the plaintiff&#039;s credit, not as compensation for breach of contract, so Article 115 did not apply. Because the money remained payable on demand to the beneficiary&#039;s order, time ran only from demand and refusal under Article 60. The suit was therefore within time and the decree for the plaintiffs was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 1937 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Nov 2018 11:36:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=541446" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1937 (10) TMI 9 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276442</link>
      <description>A bona fide family settlement resolving a genuine dispute was held enforceable without separate consideration, and the writing was capable of operating as an assignment of the beneficial interest in the deposited money under the Transfer of Property Act. On limitation, the claim was treated as one to recover money standing to the plaintiff&#039;s credit, not as compensation for breach of contract, so Article 115 did not apply. Because the money remained payable on demand to the beneficiary&#039;s order, time ran only from demand and refusal under Article 60. The suit was therefore within time and the decree for the plaintiffs was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 1937 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276442</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>