<?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>1954 (12) TMI 19 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169322</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, reversing the Appeal Court&#039;s decision and restoring the Trial Court&#039;s decree in favor of the appellant. The settlement contracts were held valid and enforceable, involving actual delivery of possession through delivery orders. The Ordinance was found to be within the legislative competence of the Provincial Legislature. The appellant was entitled to recover the claimed amount with interest and costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 1954 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2015 11:47:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=381695" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1954 (12) TMI 19 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169322</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, reversing the Appeal Court&#039;s decision and restoring the Trial Court&#039;s decree in favor of the appellant. The settlement contracts were held valid and enforceable, involving actual delivery of possession through delivery orders. The Ordinance was found to be within the legislative competence of the Provincial Legislature. The appellant was entitled to recover the claimed amount with interest and costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 1954 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169322</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>