<?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>1999 (3) TMI 669 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299306</link>
    <description>A suit that has already resulted in a decree under challenge in appeal cannot ordinarily be withdrawn at the appellate stage to nullify that decree or defeat vested rights created under it. Order 23 Rule 1 does not permit a unilateral withdrawal where the decree has crystallised the parties&#039; rights and withdrawal would prejudice those rights. Transferees pendente lite who have been impleaded in the appeal and whose interests are affected by the withdrawal application are entitled to be heard. The withdrawal application was rejected, the order permitting withdrawal was set aside, and the matter was restored for decision on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:17:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=663452" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (3) TMI 669 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299306</link>
      <description>A suit that has already resulted in a decree under challenge in appeal cannot ordinarily be withdrawn at the appellate stage to nullify that decree or defeat vested rights created under it. Order 23 Rule 1 does not permit a unilateral withdrawal where the decree has crystallised the parties&#039; rights and withdrawal would prejudice those rights. Transferees pendente lite who have been impleaded in the appeal and whose interests are affected by the withdrawal application are entitled to be heard. The withdrawal application was rejected, the order permitting withdrawal was set aside, and the matter was restored for decision on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299306</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>