<?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>2019 (3) TMI 336 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376315</link>
    <description>The appellate court allowed the appeal, set aside the order rejecting the plaint, and restored the case for a decision on its merits. It found that the lower court had erred in dismissing the suit prematurely without allowing the plaintiff to prove the alleged fiduciary relationship. The court emphasized the need for a trial to determine the existence of the fiduciary relationship as pleaded in the plaint.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Dec 2019 18:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=561760" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (3) TMI 336 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376315</link>
      <description>The appellate court allowed the appeal, set aside the order rejecting the plaint, and restored the case for a decision on its merits. It found that the lower court had erred in dismissing the suit prematurely without allowing the plaintiff to prove the alleged fiduciary relationship. The court emphasized the need for a trial to determine the existence of the fiduciary relationship as pleaded in the plaint.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Benami Property</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376315</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>