<?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>Oral Agreement on Water Lifting Ruled Unenforceable, Breaches Section 297 of the Companies Act. Contract Avoidance Moot.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=58405</link>
    <description>Enforceability and validity of Oral Agreement - oral agreement for lifting water, exists or not - The first Appellate Court rightly came to the conclusion that there has been a breach of Section 297 of the Companies Act. Since I have held that a oral contract of this nature cannot bind the defendant, the question of avoiding such a contract also does not arise. - HC</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2021 13:50:53 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2021 13:50:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=647162" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Oral Agreement on Water Lifting Ruled Unenforceable, Breaches Section 297 of the Companies Act. Contract Avoidance Moot.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=58405</link>
      <description>Enforceability and validity of Oral Agreement - oral agreement for lifting water, exists or not - The first Appellate Court rightly came to the conclusion that there has been a breach of Section 297 of the Companies Act. Since I have held that a oral contract of this nature cannot bind the defendant, the question of avoiding such a contract also does not arise. - HC</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2021 13:50:53 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=58405</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>