<?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>1999 (3) TMI 656 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272721</link>
    <description>An election petition can be rejected at the threshold only if, on the pleadings taken as true, it does not disclose a cause of action as a whole. A preliminary objection must be tested from the petition itself, not by probing counter-affidavits or dissecting isolated averments. Striking out under Order VI Rule 16 CPC is confined to pleadings that are unnecessary, scandalous, frivolous, vexatious, prejudicial, embarrassing, delaying, or abusive, while rejection under Order VII Rule 11(a) applies only where no cause of action is disclosed. The text also states that the distinction between material facts and full particulars governs applications for additional documents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Dec 2021 12:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=520253" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (3) TMI 656 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272721</link>
      <description>An election petition can be rejected at the threshold only if, on the pleadings taken as true, it does not disclose a cause of action as a whole. A preliminary objection must be tested from the petition itself, not by probing counter-affidavits or dissecting isolated averments. Striking out under Order VI Rule 16 CPC is confined to pleadings that are unnecessary, scandalous, frivolous, vexatious, prejudicial, embarrassing, delaying, or abusive, while rejection under Order VII Rule 11(a) applies only where no cause of action is disclosed. The text also states that the distinction between material facts and full particulars governs applications for additional documents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272721</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>