Infrastructure-development deduction remains available to EPC contractors when substantive statutory conditions outweigh contractor labels in agreemen...
Explained Investment Sources: documented gifts and traceable salary savings supported deletion of additions for property and mutual-fund SIP investmen...
Internal comparable pricing supports arm's-length interest on compulsorily convertible debentures, preventing their recharacterisation as equity for t...
Nominee director protection shields independent financial-institution appointees from criminal liability where they lack involvement in deposit defaul...
Suit for malicious prosecution against government authorities is...
Malicious prosecution suit against government authorities barred for late notice, overruling HC's view. Notice must precede limitation expiry per precedents.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Suit for malicious prosecution against government authorities is barred by limitation as notice u/s 80 CPC was issued after expiry of limitation period, contrary to rulings in Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Puri v. Gangaram Chhapolia and State of Gujarat v. Kothari and Associates, which mandate notice before limitation expires. High Court's view declaring suit maintainable is set aside and quashed, with declaration that suit is time-barred.
Suit for malicious prosecution against government authorities is barred by limitation as notice u/s 80 CPC was issued after expiry of limitation period, contrary to rulings in Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Puri v. Gangaram Chhapolia and State of Gujarat v. Kothari and Associates, which mandate notice before limitation expires. High Court's view declaring suit maintainable is set aside and quashed, with declaration that suit is time-barred.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.