<?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>1990 (10) TMI 373 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185851</link>
    <description>Relief under the Andhra Pradesh Agriculturists Relief Act, 1938 was unavailable to the respondent against the appellant, and that denial was affirmed. The distinct question whether the debt was liable to be scaled down under the Usurious Loans Act, 1918 remained open because it depended on the extent to which that Act applied to the debt in question. The High Court&#039;s judgment was set aside and the second appeal was restored for fresh disposal on that limited point.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2016 16:26:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=439560" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (10) TMI 373 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185851</link>
      <description>Relief under the Andhra Pradesh Agriculturists Relief Act, 1938 was unavailable to the respondent against the appellant, and that denial was affirmed. The distinct question whether the debt was liable to be scaled down under the Usurious Loans Act, 1918 remained open because it depended on the extent to which that Act applied to the debt in question. The High Court&#039;s judgment was set aside and the second appeal was restored for fresh disposal on that limited point.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185851</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>