<?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>2013 (11) TMI 1812 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312715</link>
    <description>The HC overturned the Trial Court&#039;s dismissal of the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C., allowing the petitioner to introduce new evidence, including a notarized power of attorney. The HC emphasized the importance of rectifying procedural defects to ensure a fair trial and upheld the principles of justice. Costs were imposed on the petitioner for the respondent. The parties were directed to appear before the Trial Court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Mar 2024 15:17:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=745656" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (11) TMI 1812 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312715</link>
      <description>The HC overturned the Trial Court&#039;s dismissal of the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C., allowing the petitioner to introduce new evidence, including a notarized power of attorney. The HC emphasized the importance of rectifying procedural defects to ensure a fair trial and upheld the principles of justice. Costs were imposed on the petitioner for the respondent. The parties were directed to appear before the Trial Court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312715</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>