<?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>2013 (10) TMI 1559 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299985</link>
    <description>The Karnataka High Court disposed of the petition seeking direction for consideration of representation and mandamus for an attested copy of an assignment agreement. The court noted the assignment of debt to respondent No.2, making the petitioner&#039;s prayers directed towards respondent No.1 irrelevant. Despite the petitioner&#039;s request for time to pay the agreed amount to respondent No.2 for settlement, the court emphasized the lack of good faith in payment delays. However, the court allowed the petitioner to make substantial payments to respondent No.2 and request additional time for the remaining balance, subject to respondent No.2&#039;s consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2022 16:22:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=666477" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (10) TMI 1559 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299985</link>
      <description>The Karnataka High Court disposed of the petition seeking direction for consideration of representation and mandamus for an attested copy of an assignment agreement. The court noted the assignment of debt to respondent No.2, making the petitioner&#039;s prayers directed towards respondent No.1 irrelevant. Despite the petitioner&#039;s request for time to pay the agreed amount to respondent No.2 for settlement, the court emphasized the lack of good faith in payment delays. However, the court allowed the petitioner to make substantial payments to respondent No.2 and request additional time for the remaining balance, subject to respondent No.2&#039;s consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299985</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>