<?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>1986 (12) TMI 384 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275325</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court held that no revision lies to the High Court under Section 115 of the CPC from a revision order passed under Section 20 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965. The Court emphasized the finality of the appellate authority&#039;s decision under the Act and reinstated the decisions of the lower courts, ruling out the possibility of a second revision to the High Court under Section 115 of the CPC. The appeal was allowed with no order as to costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2018 15:02:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=536173" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (12) TMI 384 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275325</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court held that no revision lies to the High Court under Section 115 of the CPC from a revision order passed under Section 20 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965. The Court emphasized the finality of the appellate authority&#039;s decision under the Act and reinstated the decisions of the lower courts, ruling out the possibility of a second revision to the High Court under Section 115 of the CPC. The appeal was allowed with no order as to costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275325</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>