https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=472581 Material misrepresentation or fraudulent concealment of title defects can make an MoU voidable at the aggrieved developer's option, enabling repudiation and restitution of a refundable advance retained after the owner's breach. Continuing title-document defaults, discovery of an undisclosed injunction, and later refund assurances may constitute successive causes of action for limitation purposes. Simple interest may compensate prolonged retention in a commercial transaction. Recovery of architects' fees, project expenses, and business-loss damages requires documentary proof and proof of actual loss; unsupported claims fail. A company director incurs no personal liability merely from the company's MoU unless an independent undertaking or grounds to disregard separate corporate personality exist. en-us Mon, 06 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Oct 2026 14:41:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=472581 Material misrepresentation or fraudulent concealment of title defects can make an MoU voidable at the aggrieved developer's option, enabling repudiation and restitution of a refundable advance retained after the owner's breach. Continuing title-document defaults, discovery of an undisclosed injunction, and later refund assurances may constitute successive causes of action for limitation purposes. Simple interest may compensate prolonged retention in a commercial transaction. Recovery of architects' fees, project expenses, and business-loss damages requires documentary proof and proof of actual loss; unsupported claims fail. A company director incurs no personal liability merely from the company's MoU unless an independent undertaking or grounds to disregard separate corporate personality exist. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 06 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=472581