<?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>1992 (4) TMI 257 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282056</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the application for condonation of delay in filing objections to an award, emphasizing the strict construction of the Limitation Act and the need for a valid explanation for any delay. The court found the reasons provided for the delay insufficient and rejected the objections as time-barred. Consequently, the court upheld the award as a rule of the court, passing a decree in favor of the petitioner without awarding any costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Jul 2019 18:02:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=580134" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (4) TMI 257 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282056</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the application for condonation of delay in filing objections to an award, emphasizing the strict construction of the Limitation Act and the need for a valid explanation for any delay. The court found the reasons provided for the delay insufficient and rejected the objections as time-barred. Consequently, the court upheld the award as a rule of the court, passing a decree in favor of the petitioner without awarding any costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282056</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>