<?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>2010 (9) TMI 1294 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310046</link>
    <description>Section 27 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 gives jurisdiction to the court within whose local limits the aggrieved person permanently or temporarily resides, works, carries on business, or where the cause of action arises. A temporary residence must be a dwelling adopted because of domestic violence, with some continuity and practical connection to the aggrieved person&#039;s situation; a casual, artificial, or litigation-driven stay is insufficient. On the stated facts, a woman staying with her sister in Delhi after taking shelter there could invoke Delhi jurisdiction, and the challenge to jurisdiction was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Oct 2023 11:34:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=727990" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (9) TMI 1294 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310046</link>
      <description>Section 27 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 gives jurisdiction to the court within whose local limits the aggrieved person permanently or temporarily resides, works, carries on business, or where the cause of action arises. A temporary residence must be a dwelling adopted because of domestic violence, with some continuity and practical connection to the aggrieved person&#039;s situation; a casual, artificial, or litigation-driven stay is insufficient. On the stated facts, a woman staying with her sister in Delhi after taking shelter there could invoke Delhi jurisdiction, and the challenge to jurisdiction was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310046</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>