<?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 (7) TMI 1130 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296069</link>
    <description>The High Court allowed the second appeal, setting aside the judgment of the lower appellate court and restoring the trial court&#039;s decision. The plaintiff&#039;s suit for permanent injunction was dismissed as the court held that the plaintiff failed to prove his possession and enjoyment of the suit property. The validity of the lease deeds was confirmed, and the issue of mis-joinder of parties was not addressed significantly in the final judgment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Jul 2021 16:45:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=648503" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (7) TMI 1130 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296069</link>
      <description>The High Court allowed the second appeal, setting aside the judgment of the lower appellate court and restoring the trial court&#039;s decision. The plaintiff&#039;s suit for permanent injunction was dismissed as the court held that the plaintiff failed to prove his possession and enjoyment of the suit property. The validity of the lease deeds was confirmed, and the issue of mis-joinder of parties was not addressed significantly in the final judgment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296069</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>