<?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>2013 (2) TMI 875 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278783</link>
    <description>A written banachitti containing the essential terms of sale, including property, consideration and payment terms, was treated as a concluded contract because it was accepted and acted upon by part payment; the absence of a formal agreement did not defeat enforceability. The plea that the arrangement was contingent on the sisters&#039; consent was rejected on the basis of the surrounding conduct, including representation that the transaction was complete and the application of estoppel principles. The interlocutory injunction was left undisturbed because appellate interference is warranted only where discretion is exercised perversely or on settled legal error, and the trial court had considered the relevant injunction factors.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Feb 2019 16:53:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=559097" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (2) TMI 875 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278783</link>
      <description>A written banachitti containing the essential terms of sale, including property, consideration and payment terms, was treated as a concluded contract because it was accepted and acted upon by part payment; the absence of a formal agreement did not defeat enforceability. The plea that the arrangement was contingent on the sisters&#039; consent was rejected on the basis of the surrounding conduct, including representation that the transaction was complete and the application of estoppel principles. The interlocutory injunction was left undisturbed because appellate interference is warranted only where discretion is exercised perversely or on settled legal error, and the trial court had considered the relevant injunction factors.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278783</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>