<?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>1994 (10) TMI 332 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307532</link>
    <description>The High Court found that the appellate court erred in not considering Section 9-A of the Civil Procedure Code and the plaintiff&#039;s consent to decide the jurisdiction issue as a preliminary matter. The High Court set aside the appellate court&#039;s decision and ordered a fresh determination of the appeal with a priority on expeditious disposal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Oct 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Apr 2023 14:19:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=711315" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (10) TMI 332 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307532</link>
      <description>The High Court found that the appellate court erred in not considering Section 9-A of the Civil Procedure Code and the plaintiff&#039;s consent to decide the jurisdiction issue as a preliminary matter. The High Court set aside the appellate court&#039;s decision and ordered a fresh determination of the appeal with a priority on expeditious disposal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Oct 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307532</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>