<?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>1995 (3) TMI 497 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198673</link>
    <description>Restitution under Section 144 of the Code of Civil Procedure restores the parties to the position they would have occupied but for the erroneous decree. Where money has been realised under a decree or award that is later reversed or varied, restitution extends beyond the principal amount to interest, damages, or equivalent compensation for wrongful retention. In land acquisition matters, if enhanced compensation is later reduced on appeal, the court may direct refund of the excess amount together with interest. The appellants were therefore liable to refund the excess compensation with interest, and the restitution order was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2018 11:44:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=507928" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (3) TMI 497 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198673</link>
      <description>Restitution under Section 144 of the Code of Civil Procedure restores the parties to the position they would have occupied but for the erroneous decree. Where money has been realised under a decree or award that is later reversed or varied, restitution extends beyond the principal amount to interest, damages, or equivalent compensation for wrongful retention. In land acquisition matters, if enhanced compensation is later reduced on appeal, the court may direct refund of the excess amount together with interest. The appellants were therefore liable to refund the excess compensation with interest, and the restitution order was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198673</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>