<?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>2007 (6) TMI 571 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303947</link>
    <description>A first appeal should not be dismissed as time-barred without giving the appellant a fair opportunity to seek condonation of delay and explain sufficient cause. The appellate court must use procedure to advance substantial justice, especially because the right of first appeal is valuable and limitation should not defeat merits without hearing the party on delay. On the facts stated, the explanation for delay was accepted as sufficient, and the delay was held condonable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2022 16:05:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=688955" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (6) TMI 571 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303947</link>
      <description>A first appeal should not be dismissed as time-barred without giving the appellant a fair opportunity to seek condonation of delay and explain sufficient cause. The appellate court must use procedure to advance substantial justice, especially because the right of first appeal is valuable and limitation should not defeat merits without hearing the party on delay. On the facts stated, the explanation for delay was accepted as sufficient, and the delay was held condonable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303947</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>