<?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>1960 (5) TMI 33 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197405</link>
    <description>A stranger with no interest in the equity of redemption who pays off a mortgage as a volunteer cannot claim subrogation or force the true owner to redeem before suing for possession. The text also notes that where the owner had earlier obtained possession through court and remained in continuous possession until dispossession, limitation does not bar the suit, and prior good-faith proceedings may support exclusion of time under the Limitation Act. It further states that voluntary payment without a legal interest does not support reimbursement under the Contract Act, and no estoppel by acquiescence arises absent conduct amounting to encouragement or waiver.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 May 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Jan 2018 15:45:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=503285" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1960 (5) TMI 33 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197405</link>
      <description>A stranger with no interest in the equity of redemption who pays off a mortgage as a volunteer cannot claim subrogation or force the true owner to redeem before suing for possession. The text also notes that where the owner had earlier obtained possession through court and remained in continuous possession until dispossession, limitation does not bar the suit, and prior good-faith proceedings may support exclusion of time under the Limitation Act. It further states that voluntary payment without a legal interest does not support reimbursement under the Contract Act, and no estoppel by acquiescence arises absent conduct amounting to encouragement or waiver.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 May 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197405</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>