<?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>2005 (9) TMI 646 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183069</link>
    <description>A revision against an interlocutory injunction order under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was treated as a petition under Article 227, and that procedural conversion was upheld as within the High Court&#039;s supervisory power. In relation to the suit property, the Court preserved the existing state of affairs pending trial, continued protection against demolition, restrained the plaintiff from further construction or alteration of existing structures, and directed expeditious disposal of the suit. The underlying title and possession dispute was left to be decided by the trial court without interlocutory adjudication on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 May 2016 12:51:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=429834" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (9) TMI 646 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183069</link>
      <description>A revision against an interlocutory injunction order under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was treated as a petition under Article 227, and that procedural conversion was upheld as within the High Court&#039;s supervisory power. In relation to the suit property, the Court preserved the existing state of affairs pending trial, continued protection against demolition, restrained the plaintiff from further construction or alteration of existing structures, and directed expeditious disposal of the suit. The underlying title and possession dispute was left to be decided by the trial court without interlocutory adjudication on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183069</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>