<?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>1852 (11) TMI 1 - PRIVY COUNCIL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307333</link>
    <description>The English Statute of Limitations was treated as applicable to the East India Company&#039;s territories, with the phrase &quot;beyond the seas&quot; construed in its established legal sense as being out of the realm, including residence in India outside those territories. On that construction, the statutory saving was preserved. In suits between Hindoo parties, limitation was regarded as part of procedure and lex fori rather than a rule altering substantive native law, so the plea of limitation remained maintainable consistently with the Bombay Charter. The ratio emphasised that limitation affects the remedy, while the underlying substantive rights remain governed by the applicable personal law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 27 Nov 1852 00:00:00 +0553</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Apr 2023 15:40:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=709946" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1852 (11) TMI 1 - PRIVY COUNCIL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307333</link>
      <description>The English Statute of Limitations was treated as applicable to the East India Company&#039;s territories, with the phrase &quot;beyond the seas&quot; construed in its established legal sense as being out of the realm, including residence in India outside those territories. On that construction, the statutory saving was preserved. In suits between Hindoo parties, limitation was regarded as part of procedure and lex fori rather than a rule altering substantive native law, so the plea of limitation remained maintainable consistently with the Bombay Charter. The ratio emphasised that limitation affects the remedy, while the underlying substantive rights remain governed by the applicable personal law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 27 Nov 1852 00:00:00 +0553</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307333</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>