<?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>2020 (6) TMI 452 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396077</link>
    <description>Section 9 interim relief may, in appropriate cases, operate against a third party, but only as an exceptional measure to aid arbitration and protect the dispute property. The Delhi HC held that this relief was not justified where the auction-sale proceeds were already subject to prior judicial orders and pending claims, including an earlier recalled order that had left the parties&#039; rights open. A fresh direction to freeze or redirect the same funds would conflict with the existing order and undermine its legal effect. The request for interim protection against the third party was therefore rejected and the petition dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=615545" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (6) TMI 452 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396077</link>
      <description>Section 9 interim relief may, in appropriate cases, operate against a third party, but only as an exceptional measure to aid arbitration and protect the dispute property. The Delhi HC held that this relief was not justified where the auction-sale proceeds were already subject to prior judicial orders and pending claims, including an earlier recalled order that had left the parties&#039; rights open. A fresh direction to freeze or redirect the same funds would conflict with the existing order and undermine its legal effect. The request for interim protection against the third party was therefore rejected and the petition dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396077</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>