<?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 (4) TMI 597 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185183</link>
    <description>Section 152 CPC is confined to correcting clerical or arithmetical mistakes in a judgment or decree and cannot be used to obtain substantive relief or reopen an order that has attained finality. An application seeking enhanced benefits under Sections 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 could not, therefore, be maintained through that procedural route after the award had become final. The challenge to the High Court&#039;s view failed, and the requested relief was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2016 18:50:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=437124" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (4) TMI 597 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185183</link>
      <description>Section 152 CPC is confined to correcting clerical or arithmetical mistakes in a judgment or decree and cannot be used to obtain substantive relief or reopen an order that has attained finality. An application seeking enhanced benefits under Sections 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 could not, therefore, be maintained through that procedural route after the award had become final. The challenge to the High Court&#039;s view failed, and the requested relief was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185183</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>