<?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>CONCURRENT FINDINGS OF FACTS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=10761</link>
    <description>Concurrent findings of fact occur when an appellate court affirms the trial court&#039;s factual conclusions; under Section 100 CPC the High Court cannot reappreciate evidence in a second appeal except to decide a substantial question of law. Interference is limited to cases where findings are recorded de hors the pleadings, based on no evidence, result from misreading material, are contrary to law, or are so perverse that no reasonable judge could have reached them.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2022 08:35:35 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2022 08:35:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=693795" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>CONCURRENT FINDINGS OF FACTS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=10761</link>
      <description>Concurrent findings of fact occur when an appellate court affirms the trial court&#039;s factual conclusions; under Section 100 CPC the High Court cannot reappreciate evidence in a second appeal except to decide a substantial question of law. Interference is limited to cases where findings are recorded de hors the pleadings, based on no evidence, result from misreading material, are contrary to law, or are so perverse that no reasonable judge could have reached them.</description>
      <category>Articles</category>
      <law>Other Topics</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2022 08:35:35 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=10761</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>