<?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>1907 (2) TMI 1 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276058</link>
    <description>The High Court&#039;s power to grant leave to appeal to the Privy Council under Section 595 of the Civil Procedure Code depended on whether the refusal to admit the appeal after limitation was a decree &quot;passed on appeal&quot; or a final decree made in original civil jurisdiction. The expression &quot;passed on appeal&quot; was confined to a decree actually made in appellate proceedings, so the refusal did not satisfy clause (a). The reference to &quot;original civil jurisdiction&quot; was read by reference to the Letters Patent, and the application before the Full Bench, acting as an appellate tribunal, was not an order made in original civil jurisdiction. As the case fell within neither clause (a) nor clause (b), leave could not be granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 1907 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2018 12:24:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=539669" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1907 (2) TMI 1 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276058</link>
      <description>The High Court&#039;s power to grant leave to appeal to the Privy Council under Section 595 of the Civil Procedure Code depended on whether the refusal to admit the appeal after limitation was a decree &quot;passed on appeal&quot; or a final decree made in original civil jurisdiction. The expression &quot;passed on appeal&quot; was confined to a decree actually made in appellate proceedings, so the refusal did not satisfy clause (a). The reference to &quot;original civil jurisdiction&quot; was read by reference to the Letters Patent, and the application before the Full Bench, acting as an appellate tribunal, was not an order made in original civil jurisdiction. As the case fell within neither clause (a) nor clause (b), leave could not be granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 1907 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276058</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>