Bonds of foreign reputed companies and Army bonds
<p>Do the functioning of Bonds cease after the date of maturity of the bonds?                       </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>In what respects Army bonds differ from Bonds of foreign companies operating in INDIA?  </p>
  
  <p>if the nominees of ARMY BONDS after many years, buy BONDS of foreign companies. What will be the effects? Because the ARMY BONDS were being used against interests of buyers of the BONDS.                                      </p>
  
  <p>if the foreign offices which issued the BONDS begin to operate will it counter the effects of uses of ARMY BONDS which were inimical to the interests of buyers?will it obviate the necessity of going to law or judicial system for seeking justice? </p>
</blockquote>

<p>Normally, the term "bond" is used to refer to the standardized promissory note of a company or government (the "issuer" of the bond) in exchange for money loaned by the original "purchaser" of the bond, who is not necessarily a financial company or bank.</p>

<p>The rights of bondholders are governed by default rules of law that can usually be varied in the language setting for the rights accompanying a particular issuance of bonds. So, the rights of bondholders are not identical with all types of bonds in circulation. </p>

<p>Usually, a bond is transferrable without the permission of the bond issuer. If the original purchaser of a bond sells the bond to someone else, the buyer of the bond becomes the "bond holder" and the original purchaser usually gets money in exchange for the bond that the original purchaser used to own in exchange for selling it to the new bond holder. Somebody, either the issuer or a bond trustee (see below), or some other firm handling he details of management of interest and principal payments, needs to be informed when a bond changes ownership so that the interest and principal payments go to the right person.</p>

<p>Often, enforcement of the bond, in the event of a default, and distribution of interest payments when there is no default, is handled by a "bond trustee" who acts on behalf of the bondholders collectively. Sometimes the bond trustee is a true trustee who owns a legal interest in the bonds with the beneficial interest in the bonds owned by the person we think of as a bond holder. Sometimes the bond trustee only has something more like a power of attorney to act on behalf of the bond holders.</p>

<p>Normally, bonds cannot be prepaid by the issuer, but if a bond owner wants to get money out of the investment, the bond owner can sell the bond to someone else at the current market price (which is sometimes less than the face value if the issuer's ability to pay is in doubt or interest rates on similar bonds have risen, and sometimes is more than the face value if payment is not in doubt and interest rates on similar bonds has fallen).</p>

<p>Usually when a bond matures, the right to receive money in exchange for the matured bond continues to be in force for at least as long as the statute of limitations for suing on an unpaid promissory note. But, practices vary from one kind of bond to another. Sometimes, all bonds issued at the same time are paid in full to a bond trustee who holds the proceeds in trust for the bond owners. </p>

<p>There are other kinds of bonds which have a "maturity date" but actually just roll over and keep accruing interest after the maturity date as if nothing special had happened on that date.</p>

<p>It isn't clear what you mean when you say: "if the nominees of ARMY BONDS after many years, buy BONDS of foreign companies." </p>

<p>Some bonds are owned by someone outright, and in that case, if they sell some kinds of bonds and buy other kinds of bonds, then they own different bonds. A nominee would not normally have the power to unilaterally sell one kind of bond held for someone as a nominee and then buy another kind of bond with the proceeds of that sale. A trustee would have that power and can buy and sell trust assets as the trustee deems fit unless the trust agreement says otherwise. This again, just means that the trust which used to own one kind of bond now owners another kind of bond.</p>

<p>It isn't clear what you mean when you say: "the ARMY BONDS were being used against interests of buyers of the BONDS." </p>

<p>Bonds themselves normally can't be used against anyone. Do you mean that the Army itself, with the proceeds of the bonds that it issued, is being used in a way that hurts the bond owners?</p>

<p>It isn't clear what you mean when you say: "if the foreign offices which issued the BONDS begin to operate will it counter the effects of uses of ARMY BONDS which were inimical to the interests of buyers? will it obviate the necessity of going to law or judicial system for seeking justice?</p>

<p>I have no idea what you are trying to say here.</p>

international india securities foreign-relations tax-law