<?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>1940 (5) TMI 29 - PRIVY COUNCIL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278907</link>
    <description>The Privy Council upheld the High Court&#039;s decision in a mortgage dispute case, emphasizing the burden of proof on the defendants regarding consideration. The court found the defendants&#039; evidence lacking and the plaintiffs&#039; evidence overwhelming. An application for rehearing based on alleged negligence by the guardian was dismissed for being unsubstantial. The appeal and rehearing petition were both dismissed, with costs to be paid by the appellants to the respondents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 May 1940 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2019 17:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=559856" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1940 (5) TMI 29 - PRIVY COUNCIL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278907</link>
      <description>The Privy Council upheld the High Court&#039;s decision in a mortgage dispute case, emphasizing the burden of proof on the defendants regarding consideration. The court found the defendants&#039; evidence lacking and the plaintiffs&#039; evidence overwhelming. An application for rehearing based on alleged negligence by the guardian was dismissed for being unsubstantial. The appeal and rehearing petition were both dismissed, with costs to be paid by the appellants to the respondents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 May 1940 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278907</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>