https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292617 Money paid under protest to secure release of property wrongfully attached and detained was held recoverable as a payment made under compulsion. The special civil procedure remedy for a stranger whose property is wrongly attached was treated as permissive, not exclusive, so the payer was not confined to that route. The contractual definition of coercion was held to be limited to free consent and contract validity, and not to exhaust the broader meaning of coercion in restitutionary claims. The claim for repayment was therefore maintainable, and the matter was remitted for trial on the facts. en-us Tue, 25 Feb 1913 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Jan 2021 16:48:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292617 Money paid under protest to secure release of property wrongfully attached and detained was held recoverable as a payment made under compulsion. The special civil procedure remedy for a stranger whose property is wrongly attached was treated as permissive, not exclusive, so the payer was not confined to that route. The contractual definition of coercion was held to be limited to free consent and contract validity, and not to exhaust the broader meaning of coercion in restitutionary claims. The claim for repayment was therefore maintainable, and the matter was remitted for trial on the facts. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 25 Feb 1913 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292617