<?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>2009 (2) TMI 902 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295774</link>
    <description>The Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act, 2004 requires a mandatory sequence before attached property can be sold: attachment by Government order, publication of the order, notice to interested parties, adjudication of objections by the Special Court, and an order making the attachment absolute or varying it. Only after that stage does the power to sell under Section 11 arise. If publication, notice, or confirmation of attachment is omitted, the statutory conditions are not met and any proposed sale is without jurisdiction. The text also emphasises that strict compliance is necessary because deprivation of property engages Article 300A.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Jun 2021 14:54:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=647270" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (2) TMI 902 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295774</link>
      <description>The Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act, 2004 requires a mandatory sequence before attached property can be sold: attachment by Government order, publication of the order, notice to interested parties, adjudication of objections by the Special Court, and an order making the attachment absolute or varying it. Only after that stage does the power to sell under Section 11 arise. If publication, notice, or confirmation of attachment is omitted, the statutory conditions are not met and any proposed sale is without jurisdiction. The text also emphasises that strict compliance is necessary because deprivation of property engages Article 300A.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295774</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>