<?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>2012 (1) TMI 342 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199929</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court set aside the High Court&#039;s decision to allow an amendment of pleadings under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure after the trial had concluded. The Court emphasized the importance of demonstrating due diligence in such situations and found that the Respondents had failed to do so. The appeal was allowed, and the trial court&#039;s decision to dismiss the amendment application was upheld, with no order as to costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2018 13:21:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=512831" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (1) TMI 342 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199929</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court set aside the High Court&#039;s decision to allow an amendment of pleadings under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure after the trial had concluded. The Court emphasized the importance of demonstrating due diligence in such situations and found that the Respondents had failed to do so. The appeal was allowed, and the trial court&#039;s decision to dismiss the amendment application was upheld, with no order as to costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199929</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>