<?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>1980 (10) TMI 207 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272652</link>
    <description>Each truck owner joining in a common petition was to be treated separately for court-fee purposes where the cause of action was independent. The office was directed to scrutinise each petition individually, verify payment of the requisite court fee, and call upon counsel to make good any deficit by the specified date. If the deficit remained unpaid, the matter was to be placed before the Court for further directions, including possible notice to the individual petitioners.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 May 2018 17:57:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=519876" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (10) TMI 207 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272652</link>
      <description>Each truck owner joining in a common petition was to be treated separately for court-fee purposes where the cause of action was independent. The office was directed to scrutinise each petition individually, verify payment of the requisite court fee, and call upon counsel to make good any deficit by the specified date. If the deficit remained unpaid, the matter was to be placed before the Court for further directions, including possible notice to the individual petitioners.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272652</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>