<?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>2016 (1) TMI 1512 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459099</link>
    <description>Where the only objection was non-production of a no dues certificate, the court found no live arbitrable dispute survived because the plaintiff produced a competent sales tax certificate and the alleged defence was merely technical. Reference to arbitration under Section 8 was therefore refused. The defendant&#039;s communications acknowledging liability, together with the certificate on record, were treated as sufficient admissions showing the claim was due, so the suit was fit for disposal under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC. A decree on admissions was granted for the plaintiff with interest and costs, subject to rejection of the separate interest claim on delayed part-payment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 01 Dec 2024 09:34:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=780075" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (1) TMI 1512 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459099</link>
      <description>Where the only objection was non-production of a no dues certificate, the court found no live arbitrable dispute survived because the plaintiff produced a competent sales tax certificate and the alleged defence was merely technical. Reference to arbitration under Section 8 was therefore refused. The defendant&#039;s communications acknowledging liability, together with the certificate on record, were treated as sufficient admissions showing the claim was due, so the suit was fit for disposal under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC. A decree on admissions was granted for the plaintiff with interest and costs, subject to rejection of the separate interest claim on delayed part-payment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459099</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>