<?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>1960 (2) TMI 67 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273021</link>
    <description>Amendments to revisional jurisdiction applied to pending proceedings because no right to insist on finality of an order arises before the order is actually made, so the High Court could entertain revision under the amended Section 15. The amended eviction ground did not apply retrospectively, as it affected substantive rights and no express or implied retrospective intent was shown, so pending eviction matters remained governed by the unamended provision. The landlord&#039;s bona fide requirement for reconstruction was upheld because the revisional power extended to reviewing legality or propriety, and the evidence showed prompt municipal sanction and genuine reconstruction steps.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 May 2018 12:50:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=522133" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1960 (2) TMI 67 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273021</link>
      <description>Amendments to revisional jurisdiction applied to pending proceedings because no right to insist on finality of an order arises before the order is actually made, so the High Court could entertain revision under the amended Section 15. The amended eviction ground did not apply retrospectively, as it affected substantive rights and no express or implied retrospective intent was shown, so pending eviction matters remained governed by the unamended provision. The landlord&#039;s bona fide requirement for reconstruction was upheld because the revisional power extended to reviewing legality or propriety, and the evidence showed prompt municipal sanction and genuine reconstruction steps.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273021</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>