<?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>2024 (8) TMI 388 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756684</link>
    <description>A later leave and licence arrangement could not displace a prior mortgagee&#039;s security interest or elevate an unsecured licensee into a secured creditor; any claim arising from the licence remained against the licensors, and lis pendens protected the pending enforcement proceedings. A secured asset could not be sold below the reserve price by treating the licensee&#039;s alleged dues as part of the bid, because the reserve price was a binding auction condition and an unsecured claim could not be converted into secured priority. The auction approval was therefore quashed, the prior sale and consequential steps were annulled, and a fresh auction was directed in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Aug 2024 10:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=763305" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (8) TMI 388 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756684</link>
      <description>A later leave and licence arrangement could not displace a prior mortgagee&#039;s security interest or elevate an unsecured licensee into a secured creditor; any claim arising from the licence remained against the licensors, and lis pendens protected the pending enforcement proceedings. A secured asset could not be sold below the reserve price by treating the licensee&#039;s alleged dues as part of the bid, because the reserve price was a binding auction condition and an unsecured claim could not be converted into secured priority. The auction approval was therefore quashed, the prior sale and consequential steps were annulled, and a fresh auction was directed in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756684</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>