<?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>2006 (4) TMI 150 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47779</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner could not bypass the arbitration clause and seek remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution. The court advised resolving the dispute through arbitration as per the auction sale conditions. It found no violation of natural justice or Article 14, upholding the respondents&#039; right to withdraw goods based on the agreed terms.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 17:52:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=86297" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (4) TMI 150 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47779</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner could not bypass the arbitration clause and seek remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution. The court advised resolving the dispute through arbitration as per the auction sale conditions. It found no violation of natural justice or Article 14, upholding the respondents&#039; right to withdraw goods based on the agreed terms.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47779</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>