<?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>1936 (11) TMI 30 - HIGH COURT OF LAHORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292667</link>
    <description>Employee security deposits made to an employer for due performance of duties did not create a trust, because there was no defined trust object and no obligation on the employer to administer the funds as trustee. The relationship was held to be debtor and creditor, not beneficiary and trustee. The deposited amount therefore was not trust money in insolvency and the depositors were not entitled to priority over general creditors.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 1936 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Jan 2021 12:32:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=632020" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1936 (11) TMI 30 - HIGH COURT OF LAHORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292667</link>
      <description>Employee security deposits made to an employer for due performance of duties did not create a trust, because there was no defined trust object and no obligation on the employer to administer the funds as trustee. The relationship was held to be debtor and creditor, not beneficiary and trustee. The deposited amount therefore was not trust money in insolvency and the depositors were not entitled to priority over general creditors.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 1936 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292667</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>