<?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>1960 (10) TMI 106 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308903</link>
    <description>The appeal was dismissed, affirming the High Court&#039;s decision. The Court found that the Home Secretary had properly applied his mind before granting sanction, the issue of defamation would be decided during the trial, the Sessions Judge had jurisdiction to entertain the complaint, and the provisions of Section 198B were satisfied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Oct 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 31 Jul 2023 14:35:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=721101" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1960 (10) TMI 106 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308903</link>
      <description>The appeal was dismissed, affirming the High Court&#039;s decision. The Court found that the Home Secretary had properly applied his mind before granting sanction, the issue of defamation would be decided during the trial, the Sessions Judge had jurisdiction to entertain the complaint, and the provisions of Section 198B were satisfied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Oct 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308903</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>