<?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>2002 (10) TMI 823 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458829</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed the plaintiffs&#039; appeal, affirming the validity of the decree favoring the defendant. The court ruled that the decree, resulting from a family settlement, did not require registration and was binding. The plaintiffs lacked locus standi to challenge the decree posthumously after Basti Ram&#039;s voluntary consent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Nov 2024 13:05:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=778223" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (10) TMI 823 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458829</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed the plaintiffs&#039; appeal, affirming the validity of the decree favoring the defendant. The court ruled that the decree, resulting from a family settlement, did not require registration and was binding. The plaintiffs lacked locus standi to challenge the decree posthumously after Basti Ram&#039;s voluntary consent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458829</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>