<?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>2004 (11) TMI 628 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461898</link>
    <description>The SC ruled in favor of the plaintiff, affirming that the defendant breached a contractual obligation by failing to deliver specified goods within the agreed timeframe. The court determined the breach constituted a material violation of contract terms, entitling the plaintiff to damages for economic losses incurred. The judgment established that precise contract performance timelines are legally binding and enforceable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 May 2025 17:27:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=820198" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (11) TMI 628 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461898</link>
      <description>The SC ruled in favor of the plaintiff, affirming that the defendant breached a contractual obligation by failing to deliver specified goods within the agreed timeframe. The court determined the breach constituted a material violation of contract terms, entitling the plaintiff to damages for economic losses incurred. The judgment established that precise contract performance timelines are legally binding and enforceable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461898</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>