https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110252 Section 31 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 was construed as a regulatory restriction backed by penalty, not as a provision that by itself extinguished civil title or invalidated an inherited share. The Court held that the plaintiffs' claim through inheritance was not defeated by the statutory bar and that the Reserve Bank of India general permission for acquisition of immovable property by purchase or inheritance applied, since the cause of action arose after the notification came into force. The trial court's decree was upheld as correct in law and on evidence. en-us Mon, 01 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Apr 2012 13:31:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110252 Section 31 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 was construed as a regulatory restriction backed by penalty, not as a provision that by itself extinguished civil title or invalidated an inherited share. The Court held that the plaintiffs' claim through inheritance was not defeated by the statutory bar and that the Reserve Bank of India general permission for acquisition of immovable property by purchase or inheritance applied, since the cause of action arose after the notification came into force. The trial court's decree was upheld as correct in law and on evidence. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 01 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110252