https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156427 An allottee in possession and the statutory Custodian were treated as having sufficient locus to challenge orders affecting evacuee property. Section 8 was read as mandatory on limitation, with delayed claims requiring recorded sufficient cause and stale claims beyond an outer limit of twelve years being non-entertainable. The revisional power under Section 30 was held broad enough to examine material facts where needed to test legality and propriety. A Will and probate could not confer enforceable rights in property already vested in the Custodian, and a claimant could not derive an independent restoration claim through an heir's dismissed Section 8 application. en-us Wed, 03 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Jun 2014 10:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156427 An allottee in possession and the statutory Custodian were treated as having sufficient locus to challenge orders affecting evacuee property. Section 8 was read as mandatory on limitation, with delayed claims requiring recorded sufficient cause and stale claims beyond an outer limit of twelve years being non-entertainable. The revisional power under Section 30 was held broad enough to examine material facts where needed to test legality and propriety. A Will and probate could not confer enforceable rights in property already vested in the Custodian, and a claimant could not derive an independent restoration claim through an heir's dismissed Section 8 application. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 03 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156427