<?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 (12) TMI 1201 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287764</link>
    <description>The court condoned delays in filing and re-filing the appeal, allowed the amendment of the prayer clause, rejected the application for rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, upheld the interim injunction order, and found the suit not barred by the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988. The appellate court affirmed the Single Judge&#039;s decisions, dismissing the appeal and ordering costs of Rs. 15,000/- to be paid to the respondent within four weeks.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2020 16:47:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=611790" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (12) TMI 1201 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287764</link>
      <description>The court condoned delays in filing and re-filing the appeal, allowed the amendment of the prayer clause, rejected the application for rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, upheld the interim injunction order, and found the suit not barred by the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988. The appellate court affirmed the Single Judge&#039;s decisions, dismissing the appeal and ordering costs of Rs. 15,000/- to be paid to the respondent within four weeks.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Benami Property</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287764</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>