<?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>1981 (12) TMI 181 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288257</link>
    <description>Liability for mesne profits after extinction of a mortgage was not treated as a liability arising out of breach of trust under Section 2(3)(c) of the Kerala Debt Relief Act, 1977. The exclusion applies only to breach of trust in the legal sense, not to every fiduciary or confidence-based obligation, and a mortgagee in possession is not a trustee for all purposes. Because the mesne profits claim arose from continued occupation after the mortgage ended, and the pleadings did not establish breach of trust as its foundation, the liability was not excluded from the Act&#039;s definition of debt and the petitioner was not disqualified from seeking protection.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 May 2020 11:24:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=613847" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1981 (12) TMI 181 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288257</link>
      <description>Liability for mesne profits after extinction of a mortgage was not treated as a liability arising out of breach of trust under Section 2(3)(c) of the Kerala Debt Relief Act, 1977. The exclusion applies only to breach of trust in the legal sense, not to every fiduciary or confidence-based obligation, and a mortgagee in possession is not a trustee for all purposes. Because the mesne profits claim arose from continued occupation after the mortgage ended, and the pleadings did not establish breach of trust as its foundation, the liability was not excluded from the Act&#039;s definition of debt and the petitioner was not disqualified from seeking protection.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288257</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>