<?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>1959 (8) TMI 54 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276937</link>
    <description>The impugned resumption order, made while Junagadh was under Dominion administration, was treated as an act of State because it was a sovereign act during the process of territorial acquisition and not an exercise of municipal law. The Court held that the residents&#039; asserted rights had not yet been recognised by the new sovereign, so they were not enforceable in municipal courts. As the Dominion&#039;s assumption of administration had not terminated when the order was passed, the dispute was non-justiciable and the suit could not be maintained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 1959 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2018 15:57:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=542833" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1959 (8) TMI 54 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276937</link>
      <description>The impugned resumption order, made while Junagadh was under Dominion administration, was treated as an act of State because it was a sovereign act during the process of territorial acquisition and not an exercise of municipal law. The Court held that the residents&#039; asserted rights had not yet been recognised by the new sovereign, so they were not enforceable in municipal courts. As the Dominion&#039;s assumption of administration had not terminated when the order was passed, the dispute was non-justiciable and the suit could not be maintained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 1959 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276937</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>