<?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>2010 (9) TMI 886 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212014</link>
    <description>The SC allowed appeals and remanded the case to the State Commission for hearing on merits. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission had dismissed a revision petition without providing reasons. The court held that the bank, having filed a separate appeal, had an independent right to be heard in support of its appeal, which was denied by the State Commission. The case was remanded for proper consideration of the appeals on their merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Jun 2025 13:06:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=185428" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (9) TMI 886 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212014</link>
      <description>The SC allowed appeals and remanded the case to the State Commission for hearing on merits. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission had dismissed a revision petition without providing reasons. The court held that the bank, having filed a separate appeal, had an independent right to be heard in support of its appeal, which was denied by the State Commission. The case was remanded for proper consideration of the appeals on their merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212014</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>