<?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>2012 (4) TMI 773 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287025</link>
    <description>The Court allowed the revision, set aside the impugned order, and dismissed the respondent&#039;s suit as barred under section 4(1) of the Benami Transactions Act. The Court upheld the application of the petitioners under Order 7, Rule 11(d) and emphasized the Act&#039;s applicability to claims made post its enforcement, resulting in the dismissal of the suit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2020 14:12:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=608071" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (4) TMI 773 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287025</link>
      <description>The Court allowed the revision, set aside the impugned order, and dismissed the respondent&#039;s suit as barred under section 4(1) of the Benami Transactions Act. The Court upheld the application of the petitioners under Order 7, Rule 11(d) and emphasized the Act&#039;s applicability to claims made post its enforcement, resulting in the dismissal of the suit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Benami Property</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287025</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>