<?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>2006 (11) TMI 654 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183899</link>
    <description>Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act enlarges a Hindu widow&#039;s limited estate into absolute ownership where she possesses property in lieu of her pre-existing maintenance right, enabling her to validly transfer it by gift. Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure confines second appellate interference with factual findings to cases involving a formulated substantial question of law; well-considered first appellate findings cannot ordinarily be reversed without cogent legal grounds. The stated outcome is that the widow&#039;s gift deed was valid and the High Court&#039;s interference with the appellate findings was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2016 13:18:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=432719" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (11) TMI 654 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183899</link>
      <description>Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act enlarges a Hindu widow&#039;s limited estate into absolute ownership where she possesses property in lieu of her pre-existing maintenance right, enabling her to validly transfer it by gift. Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure confines second appellate interference with factual findings to cases involving a formulated substantial question of law; well-considered first appellate findings cannot ordinarily be reversed without cogent legal grounds. The stated outcome is that the widow&#039;s gift deed was valid and the High Court&#039;s interference with the appellate findings was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183899</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>