<?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 (9) TMI 1079 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313717</link>
    <description>Civil contempt under section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 requires wilful disobedience of a court order. The Bombay HC accepted the respondents&#039; explanation that non-payment of salary and allowances resulted from severe financial difficulties of the trust and school, supported by account statements and balance sheets, rather than deliberate defiance. As the element of wilful disobedience was not proved, contempt was not established against the respondents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2024 17:27:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=751453" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (9) TMI 1079 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313717</link>
      <description>Civil contempt under section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 requires wilful disobedience of a court order. The Bombay HC accepted the respondents&#039; explanation that non-payment of salary and allowances resulted from severe financial difficulties of the trust and school, supported by account statements and balance sheets, rather than deliberate defiance. As the element of wilful disobedience was not proved, contempt was not established against the respondents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313717</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>