<?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>1975 (9) TMI 186 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189037</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court affirmed the fairness of the partition of immovable properties but found a clear disparity in the partition of movable properties, totaling Rs. 37,500. The plaintiffs were awarded Rs. 46,500, including interest, representing their rightful share of the movable properties. The Court emphasized the need to protect minors&#039; interests and the possibility of reopening a partition if found unjust, regardless of the time passed since the partition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Dec 2016 11:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=452926" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1975 (9) TMI 186 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189037</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court affirmed the fairness of the partition of immovable properties but found a clear disparity in the partition of movable properties, totaling Rs. 37,500. The plaintiffs were awarded Rs. 46,500, including interest, representing their rightful share of the movable properties. The Court emphasized the need to protect minors&#039; interests and the possibility of reopening a partition if found unjust, regardless of the time passed since the partition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189037</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>