<?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>1958 (4) TMI 125 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277217</link>
    <description>The court concluded that the plaintiff&#039;s suit was barred by limitation as the plaintiff did not meet the conditions required to invoke Section 14 of the Limitation Act. The plaintiff failed to show due diligence and good faith in prosecuting the previous suit, and the initial filing in a court lacking pecuniary jurisdiction was not done with due care and attention. Therefore, the appeals were allowed, and the suit was dismissed with costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Apr 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2018 12:04:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=544600" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1958 (4) TMI 125 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277217</link>
      <description>The court concluded that the plaintiff&#039;s suit was barred by limitation as the plaintiff did not meet the conditions required to invoke Section 14 of the Limitation Act. The plaintiff failed to show due diligence and good faith in prosecuting the previous suit, and the initial filing in a court lacking pecuniary jurisdiction was not done with due care and attention. Therefore, the appeals were allowed, and the suit was dismissed with costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Apr 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277217</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>