<?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>2020 (4) TMI 884 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294509</link>
    <description>A writ petition against the State in a contractual payment dispute may be entertained where official correspondence, file notings and approvals disclose admitted liability and the case does not require oral evidence, so the alternative-remedy objection fails. Acknowledgments of subsisting liability, budget release, part-payment and written admissions can extend limitation, so the claims were treated as within time. Authorisation by both partners and the continuing authority of a partner to complete unfinished firm transactions supported receipt of payment by the 2nd petitioner. For pre-bifurcation contracts, liability was apportioned between the successor States in the statutory ratio.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 18 Apr 2021 20:51:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=642123" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (4) TMI 884 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294509</link>
      <description>A writ petition against the State in a contractual payment dispute may be entertained where official correspondence, file notings and approvals disclose admitted liability and the case does not require oral evidence, so the alternative-remedy objection fails. Acknowledgments of subsisting liability, budget release, part-payment and written admissions can extend limitation, so the claims were treated as within time. Authorisation by both partners and the continuing authority of a partner to complete unfinished firm transactions supported receipt of payment by the 2nd petitioner. For pre-bifurcation contracts, liability was apportioned between the successor States in the statutory ratio.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294509</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>