<?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>1913 (2) TMI 1 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277395</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the suit with costs, ruling that the dismissal of the local agent was legal, the order closing the depot was ultra vires, and the suspension pending inquiry was inconclusive but deemed non-damaging. The plaintiff&#039;s claims for damages for tortious acts and defamation were rejected based on principles of sovereign immunity and absolute privilege.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Feb 1913 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Dec 2018 13:15:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=545230" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1913 (2) TMI 1 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277395</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the suit with costs, ruling that the dismissal of the local agent was legal, the order closing the depot was ultra vires, and the suspension pending inquiry was inconclusive but deemed non-damaging. The plaintiff&#039;s claims for damages for tortious acts and defamation were rejected based on principles of sovereign immunity and absolute privilege.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Feb 1913 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277395</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>