<?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>2000 (10) TMI 988 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460670</link>
    <description>Disputed contractual claims and contentious factual findings were held unsuitable for determination in proceedings under Article 226, where civil remedies remained available. The adverse findings recorded in the writ proceedings were vacated, and the parties were left free to pursue the money claim before the civil court, including any plea for exclusion of time under Section 14 of the Limitation Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Feb 2025 14:39:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=796565" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (10) TMI 988 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460670</link>
      <description>Disputed contractual claims and contentious factual findings were held unsuitable for determination in proceedings under Article 226, where civil remedies remained available. The adverse findings recorded in the writ proceedings were vacated, and the parties were left free to pursue the money claim before the civil court, including any plea for exclusion of time under Section 14 of the Limitation Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460670</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>