<?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>1947 (2) TMI 24 - PRIVY COUNCIL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274385</link>
    <description>The judgment upheld the validity of the Punjab Restitution of Mortgaged Lands Act, 1938, ruling that it fell within the legislative competence of the Punjab Legislature under Items 2 and 21 of the Provincial Legislative List. The Act was deemed not to conflict with existing Indian laws and was not considered ultra vires of the Punjab Legislature. As a result, the appeal was dismissed, and the appellants were directed to bear the costs of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Feb 1947 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2018 15:55:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=530374" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1947 (2) TMI 24 - PRIVY COUNCIL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274385</link>
      <description>The judgment upheld the validity of the Punjab Restitution of Mortgaged Lands Act, 1938, ruling that it fell within the legislative competence of the Punjab Legislature under Items 2 and 21 of the Provincial Legislative List. The Act was deemed not to conflict with existing Indian laws and was not considered ultra vires of the Punjab Legislature. As a result, the appeal was dismissed, and the appellants were directed to bear the costs of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Feb 1947 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274385</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>