<?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>1983 (10) TMI 288 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200453</link>
    <description>Where a cause of action arose under Indian enactments extended to Goa, Daman and Diu, the Portuguese Civil Code limitation provision did not govern the suit because the corresponding Portuguese substantive provision had been repealed; Article 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applied, making the claim time-barred unless limitation was saved. The commentary also notes that a payment recorded in writing and acknowledged by the defendant&#039;s witness satisfied section 19 of the Limitation Act and created a fresh limitation period. On that basis, the appellate challenge was unsuccessful and the plaintiff&#039;s decree was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2018 10:27:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=515143" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (10) TMI 288 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200453</link>
      <description>Where a cause of action arose under Indian enactments extended to Goa, Daman and Diu, the Portuguese Civil Code limitation provision did not govern the suit because the corresponding Portuguese substantive provision had been repealed; Article 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applied, making the claim time-barred unless limitation was saved. The commentary also notes that a payment recorded in writing and acknowledged by the defendant&#039;s witness satisfied section 19 of the Limitation Act and created a fresh limitation period. On that basis, the appellate challenge was unsuccessful and the plaintiff&#039;s decree was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200453</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>