<?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>1963 (6) TMI 37 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199949</link>
    <description>The Court found the opposite party guilty of contempt for failing to vacate the premises as undertaken. The opposite party was fined Rs. 500, with a default sentence of one month of simple imprisonment, and the petitioner was awarded costs of five gold mohurs. The judgment highlighted the significance of honoring commitments made to the Court and the repercussions of dishonest behavior.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Jun 1963 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2018 17:42:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=512880" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1963 (6) TMI 37 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199949</link>
      <description>The Court found the opposite party guilty of contempt for failing to vacate the premises as undertaken. The opposite party was fined Rs. 500, with a default sentence of one month of simple imprisonment, and the petitioner was awarded costs of five gold mohurs. The judgment highlighted the significance of honoring commitments made to the Court and the repercussions of dishonest behavior.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Jun 1963 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199949</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>