<?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>2001 (1) TMI 1020 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310024</link>
    <description>Persons who represent, or intermeddle with, a deceased party&#039;s estate may be brought on record as legal representatives for the limited purpose of continuing the suit, without finally deciding title or the validity of a will. An enquiry under Order 22 Rule 5 CPC is confined to substitution and does not determine substantive rights under the will. A reasoned order passed after such enquiry is not ordinarily open to interference in revision under Section 115 CPC unless a jurisdictional defect is shown. The trial court&#039;s order allowing substitution and setting aside abatement was therefore affirmed, and revision was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Oct 2023 18:30:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=727895" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (1) TMI 1020 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310024</link>
      <description>Persons who represent, or intermeddle with, a deceased party&#039;s estate may be brought on record as legal representatives for the limited purpose of continuing the suit, without finally deciding title or the validity of a will. An enquiry under Order 22 Rule 5 CPC is confined to substitution and does not determine substantive rights under the will. A reasoned order passed after such enquiry is not ordinarily open to interference in revision under Section 115 CPC unless a jurisdictional defect is shown. The trial court&#039;s order allowing substitution and setting aside abatement was therefore affirmed, and revision was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310024</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>