https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299175 A claim by a partner in a dissolved firm to realise firm property was held outside the Section 69 bar, because the dissolved firm's rights had vested in the claimant; the suit was therefore maintainable. Limitation also did not defeat the claim, as wrongful retention of goods created a continuing cause of action rather than a bar running from an earlier criminal order. On the auction dispute, specific performance was refused because the bidder had not proved waiver of the certified re-roller condition and did not satisfy the requirements for such relief. Refund of the unpaid balance was allowed, but ancillary compensation and interest were denied. en-us Tue, 04 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Dec 2021 11:34:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299175 A claim by a partner in a dissolved firm to realise firm property was held outside the Section 69 bar, because the dissolved firm's rights had vested in the claimant; the suit was therefore maintainable. Limitation also did not defeat the claim, as wrongful retention of goods created a continuing cause of action rather than a bar running from an earlier criminal order. On the auction dispute, specific performance was refused because the bidder had not proved waiver of the certified re-roller condition and did not satisfy the requirements for such relief. Refund of the unpaid balance was allowed, but ancillary compensation and interest were denied. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 04 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299175