<?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>2015 (5) TMI 1184 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280582</link>
    <description>Allegations of theft, dishonest misappropriation and receiving stolen property were tested separately for two sets of documents. For documents 1 to 28, the originals remained with lawful custodians and the complaint disclosed only use of the contents in legal proceedings; such contents were not movable property, and any temporary shifting for copying was too trivial to constitute theft or dishonest misappropriation. For documents 29 to 54, the complaint alleged that the originals were missing from the company&#039;s custody and remained with the accused, which was sufficient at the threshold to disclose a prima facie case. The conspiracy allegation was not rejected in isolation, and the issuance of process was sustained only to the extent the complaint survived.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 May 2019 07:18:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=570752" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (5) TMI 1184 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280582</link>
      <description>Allegations of theft, dishonest misappropriation and receiving stolen property were tested separately for two sets of documents. For documents 1 to 28, the originals remained with lawful custodians and the complaint disclosed only use of the contents in legal proceedings; such contents were not movable property, and any temporary shifting for copying was too trivial to constitute theft or dishonest misappropriation. For documents 29 to 54, the complaint alleged that the originals were missing from the company&#039;s custody and remained with the accused, which was sufficient at the threshold to disclose a prima facie case. The conspiracy allegation was not rejected in isolation, and the issuance of process was sustained only to the extent the complaint survived.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280582</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>