<?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>1937 (5) TMI 7 - PRIVY COUNCIL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200504</link>
    <description>A statutory declaration that a house was insanitary was ultra vires because the authority applied a general policy standard from an official manual instead of the ordinance&#039;s specific test of whether the building was unfit for human habitation by reason of its construction or condition. The defects relied on were treated as matters of convenience or amenity, which did not satisfy that statutory threshold, so the declaration could not stand. A writ of prohibition was also not barred by the matter having been submitted to the Governor in Council, because the authority retained further statutory functions and the writ could still restrain remaining unlawful enforcement steps.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 May 1937 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Mar 2018 11:31:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=515464" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1937 (5) TMI 7 - PRIVY COUNCIL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200504</link>
      <description>A statutory declaration that a house was insanitary was ultra vires because the authority applied a general policy standard from an official manual instead of the ordinance&#039;s specific test of whether the building was unfit for human habitation by reason of its construction or condition. The defects relied on were treated as matters of convenience or amenity, which did not satisfy that statutory threshold, so the declaration could not stand. A writ of prohibition was also not barred by the matter having been submitted to the Governor in Council, because the authority retained further statutory functions and the writ could still restrain remaining unlawful enforcement steps.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 May 1937 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200504</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>