<?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>1889 (11) TMI 1 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277868</link>
    <description>Section 5 of the Limitation Act was construed liberally, and delay in filing an appeal may be condoned where the appellant acted bona fide under an honest mistake of law, provided there was no negligence, inaction, or lack of good faith. The Court noted that presenting the appeal before the wrong forum on professional advice did not automatically defeat relief, and that the discretion under Section 5 depends on the special circumstances of each case. Section 14 was treated as reflecting a legislative policy of indulgence toward a party acting under a bona fide mistake. The order refusing to entertain the appeal was therefore set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Nov 1889 00:00:00 +0521</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Dec 2018 15:06:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=549533" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1889 (11) TMI 1 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277868</link>
      <description>Section 5 of the Limitation Act was construed liberally, and delay in filing an appeal may be condoned where the appellant acted bona fide under an honest mistake of law, provided there was no negligence, inaction, or lack of good faith. The Court noted that presenting the appeal before the wrong forum on professional advice did not automatically defeat relief, and that the discretion under Section 5 depends on the special circumstances of each case. Section 14 was treated as reflecting a legislative policy of indulgence toward a party acting under a bona fide mistake. The order refusing to entertain the appeal was therefore set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Nov 1889 00:00:00 +0521</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277868</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>