<?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 (2) TMI 704 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295883</link>
    <description>A compromise decree in a partition suit is a final decree when the compromise itself fully determines the parties&#039; shares and grants separate possession, leaving nothing further to be worked out by metes and bounds or further inquiry. It is then immediately executable. Limitation for execution runs from the date the decree becomes enforceable, and mere pendency of later challenge proceedings does not stop time absent a stay or postponed enforceability. On that basis, the execution petition filed long after the decree was time-barred, and the executing court&#039;s dismissal was upheld as the High Court&#039;s contrary order could not stand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2021 17:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=647616" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (2) TMI 704 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295883</link>
      <description>A compromise decree in a partition suit is a final decree when the compromise itself fully determines the parties&#039; shares and grants separate possession, leaving nothing further to be worked out by metes and bounds or further inquiry. It is then immediately executable. Limitation for execution runs from the date the decree becomes enforceable, and mere pendency of later challenge proceedings does not stop time absent a stay or postponed enforceability. On that basis, the execution petition filed long after the decree was time-barred, and the executing court&#039;s dismissal was upheld as the High Court&#039;s contrary order could not stand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295883</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>