<?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>2009 (11) TMI 1030 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311378</link>
    <description>The petition was allowed, granting the petitioner/defendant the right to introduce a document during cross-examination and subsequently prove it. The trial court was instructed to resolve the application under section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act based on the established legal framework. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 16:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=736345" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (11) TMI 1030 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311378</link>
      <description>The petition was allowed, granting the petitioner/defendant the right to introduce a document during cross-examination and subsequently prove it. The trial court was instructed to resolve the application under section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act based on the established legal framework. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311378</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>