<?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>2020 (1) TMI 1607 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304446</link>
    <description>The High Court allowed the appeals, setting aside the orders of the Court below granting interim injunctions. It dismissed the applications for interim relief, holding that the invocation of the Bank Guarantees was proper and did not constitute fraud. The Court reiterated the principles governing the invocation of Bank Guarantees and found that the plaintiff&#039;s allegations did not meet the threshold for granting an injunction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2022 15:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=691814" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (1) TMI 1607 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304446</link>
      <description>The High Court allowed the appeals, setting aside the orders of the Court below granting interim injunctions. It dismissed the applications for interim relief, holding that the invocation of the Bank Guarantees was proper and did not constitute fraud. The Court reiterated the principles governing the invocation of Bank Guarantees and found that the plaintiff&#039;s allegations did not meet the threshold for granting an injunction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304446</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>