<?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 (8) TMI 714 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195551</link>
    <description>Amended civil procedure provisions were upheld as procedural measures aimed at speedy justice, and were construed flexibly where strict application could cause failure of justice. Affidavit-based pleadings, commissioner-led evidence, time limits for written statements, adjournments, service, costs, amendments, execution, and revision were harmonised with judicial discretion and inherent powers. Section 89 and Order X Rules 1A to 1C were interpreted to support court-directed ADR, mediation, and compromise procedures, and the proposed model ADR rules were approved in principle. Model case flow management rules were also endorsed as a workable framework for High Courts to adapt for efficient, fair, and inexpensive disposal of cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2024 10:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=494599" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (8) TMI 714 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195551</link>
      <description>Amended civil procedure provisions were upheld as procedural measures aimed at speedy justice, and were construed flexibly where strict application could cause failure of justice. Affidavit-based pleadings, commissioner-led evidence, time limits for written statements, adjournments, service, costs, amendments, execution, and revision were harmonised with judicial discretion and inherent powers. Section 89 and Order X Rules 1A to 1C were interpreted to support court-directed ADR, mediation, and compromise procedures, and the proposed model ADR rules were approved in principle. Model case flow management rules were also endorsed as a workable framework for High Courts to adapt for efficient, fair, and inexpensive disposal of cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195551</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>