<?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>1969 (8) TMI 89 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199950</link>
    <description>The High Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff in a case against the Indore Municipal Corporation, declaring their dismissal illegal and ordering reinstatement and salary arrears. The Court found the dismissal order by Shri Ghatpande invalid due to lack of jurisdiction. The defense of limitation raised by the Municipal Corporation was rejected, determining the suit fell under a different provision. The interpretation of relevant sections clarified distinctions in suits against the Municipal Council. The Court emphasized that actions taken without jurisdiction do not receive statutory protection, leading to the dismissal of the appeal with costs against the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2018 17:46:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=512881" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1969 (8) TMI 89 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199950</link>
      <description>The High Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff in a case against the Indore Municipal Corporation, declaring their dismissal illegal and ordering reinstatement and salary arrears. The Court found the dismissal order by Shri Ghatpande invalid due to lack of jurisdiction. The defense of limitation raised by the Municipal Corporation was rejected, determining the suit fell under a different provision. The interpretation of relevant sections clarified distinctions in suits against the Municipal Council. The Court emphasized that actions taken without jurisdiction do not receive statutory protection, leading to the dismissal of the appeal with costs against the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199950</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>