<?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>1954 (6) TMI 15 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278880</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the appeal, holding that the State of Bihar could be held guilty of contempt for disobeying an injunction order and that the issuance and publication of the notification were not inadvertent. The court also found that Order 39, Rule 2(3), CPC, applies to the State, allowing for the attachment of property as a form of disciplinary action.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 1954 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Feb 2019 12:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=559642" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1954 (6) TMI 15 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278880</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the appeal, holding that the State of Bihar could be held guilty of contempt for disobeying an injunction order and that the issuance and publication of the notification were not inadvertent. The court also found that Order 39, Rule 2(3), CPC, applies to the State, allowing for the attachment of property as a form of disciplinary action.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 1954 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278880</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>