<?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>2019 (3) TMI 1879 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294692</link>
    <description>Allegations arising from an agreement to sell did not disclose cheating because the material showed receipt of earnest money, termination notice, a reply indicating novation of the contractual deadline, and steps taken by the seller to obtain the sanctioned plan and clear bank dues. The dispute was therefore treated as one concerning performance of contractual obligations, with no satisfactory basis to infer deception at the inception of the transaction. The criminal case was found to be an impermissible attempt to convert a civil dispute into a prosecution, so the proceedings against the petitioner were quashed for want of the ingredients of cheating, while the order dropping proceedings against the broker was affirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2021 11:51:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=642914" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (3) TMI 1879 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294692</link>
      <description>Allegations arising from an agreement to sell did not disclose cheating because the material showed receipt of earnest money, termination notice, a reply indicating novation of the contractual deadline, and steps taken by the seller to obtain the sanctioned plan and clear bank dues. The dispute was therefore treated as one concerning performance of contractual obligations, with no satisfactory basis to infer deception at the inception of the transaction. The criminal case was found to be an impermissible attempt to convert a civil dispute into a prosecution, so the proceedings against the petitioner were quashed for want of the ingredients of cheating, while the order dropping proceedings against the broker was affirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294692</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>