<?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 (4) TMI 1020 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468211</link>
    <description>A statutory notice for a no-confidence motion is directory where its purpose is to inform members of the meeting particulars and secure participation. The prescribed form and mode under Section 15(3)(ii) read with Rule 2 and Form II are not mandatory in the sense that every deviation invalidates the proceedings; substantial compliance is sufficient. Omission to enclose the full signed motion or the names of signatories does not by itself vitiate the proceedings if the members receive the essential information and the object of the provision is achieved. The contrary view in Ram Nath Tripathi was disapproved.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2026 17:43:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=897928" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (4) TMI 1020 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468211</link>
      <description>A statutory notice for a no-confidence motion is directory where its purpose is to inform members of the meeting particulars and secure participation. The prescribed form and mode under Section 15(3)(ii) read with Rule 2 and Form II are not mandatory in the sense that every deviation invalidates the proceedings; substantial compliance is sufficient. Omission to enclose the full signed motion or the names of signatories does not by itself vitiate the proceedings if the members receive the essential information and the object of the provision is achieved. The contrary view in Ram Nath Tripathi was disapproved.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468211</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>