<?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>1936 (3) TMI 16 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292796</link>
    <description>Section 8(2) of the Presidency-towns Insolvency Act was treated as conferring a substantive right of appeal against orders made in insolvency matters. The reference to appeals proceeding in the same manner as appeals from orders in ordinary original civil jurisdiction was held to regulate procedure, not to confine the appeal only to orders independently appealable on the Original Side. The contrary view, that no appeal lay unless the order satisfied Order XLIII Rule 1 or the definition of judgment, was rejected. The preliminary objection to maintainability was therefore rejected, though the appeal was ultimately dismissed on the merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 1936 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Jan 2021 11:02:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=632494" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1936 (3) TMI 16 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292796</link>
      <description>Section 8(2) of the Presidency-towns Insolvency Act was treated as conferring a substantive right of appeal against orders made in insolvency matters. The reference to appeals proceeding in the same manner as appeals from orders in ordinary original civil jurisdiction was held to regulate procedure, not to confine the appeal only to orders independently appealable on the Original Side. The contrary view, that no appeal lay unless the order satisfied Order XLIII Rule 1 or the definition of judgment, was rejected. The preliminary objection to maintainability was therefore rejected, though the appeal was ultimately dismissed on the merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 1936 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292796</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>