<?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>2015 (7) TMI 21 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261060</link>
    <description>Condonation of over-ten-year delay in an appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act was refused and the appeal decided against the appellants. The SC held that invoking knowledge of relief granted in similar cases does not excuse delay or laches, reiterating prior rulings where petitions filed after learning of favorable judgments were rejected for inordinate delay. Attempts to rely on subsequent decisions or declarations of law as justification for long delay were held insufficient to warrant condonation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Sep 2025 10:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=388915" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (7) TMI 21 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261060</link>
      <description>Condonation of over-ten-year delay in an appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act was refused and the appeal decided against the appellants. The SC held that invoking knowledge of relief granted in similar cases does not excuse delay or laches, reiterating prior rulings where petitions filed after learning of favorable judgments were rejected for inordinate delay. Attempts to rely on subsequent decisions or declarations of law as justification for long delay were held insufficient to warrant condonation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261060</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>