<?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>2009 (12) TMI 1031 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281897</link>
    <description>A 52-day delay in filing an appeal under the Limitation Act should be assessed with a liberal, justice-oriented approach, and a bona fide explanation such as misplaced papers and communication difficulties with counsel was sufficient to prevent rejection on technical grounds; the wife&#039;s appeal was restored. Interim maintenance for a minor child and a residence direction under the Domestic Violence Act were treated as protective interim arrangements, not final determinations, and were therefore not amenable to revision. The shared accommodation finding also supported the wife&#039;s interim residence right. The husband&#039;s revision was dismissed and the interim maintenance and residence orders were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:41:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=578934" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (12) TMI 1031 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281897</link>
      <description>A 52-day delay in filing an appeal under the Limitation Act should be assessed with a liberal, justice-oriented approach, and a bona fide explanation such as misplaced papers and communication difficulties with counsel was sufficient to prevent rejection on technical grounds; the wife&#039;s appeal was restored. Interim maintenance for a minor child and a residence direction under the Domestic Violence Act were treated as protective interim arrangements, not final determinations, and were therefore not amenable to revision. The shared accommodation finding also supported the wife&#039;s interim residence right. The husband&#039;s revision was dismissed and the interim maintenance and residence orders were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281897</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>