<?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>2003 (11) TMI 622 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197779</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the trial court&#039;s decision, ruling in favor of the respondent based on her legal right to raise the defense of not inheriting any property from the deceased in the debt recovery suit. The judgment highlighted the importance of legal representatives&#039; rights in such cases and clarified the applicability of Section 52 of the Code of Civil Procedure in debt recovery proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Jan 2018 17:26:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=504538" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (11) TMI 622 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197779</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the trial court&#039;s decision, ruling in favor of the respondent based on her legal right to raise the defense of not inheriting any property from the deceased in the debt recovery suit. The judgment highlighted the importance of legal representatives&#039; rights in such cases and clarified the applicability of Section 52 of the Code of Civil Procedure in debt recovery proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197779</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>