<?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>1994 (8) TMI 294 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168139</link>
    <description>Section 8A of the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971 is described as a wide first appeal, enabling the High Court to reappreciate evidence and independently examine findings on fact and law, including whether land was private forest under personal cultivation on the appointed day. The text also explains that entitlement to retain land under section 3(2) depends on the applicable family ceiling and proved extent, with the retention analysis linked to broader allocation principles under section 3(3) and the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963. On that reasoning, the disputed extent was treated as within the permissible limit, subject to ceiling-based adjustment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Aug 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2015 14:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=374425" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (8) TMI 294 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168139</link>
      <description>Section 8A of the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971 is described as a wide first appeal, enabling the High Court to reappreciate evidence and independently examine findings on fact and law, including whether land was private forest under personal cultivation on the appointed day. The text also explains that entitlement to retain land under section 3(2) depends on the applicable family ceiling and proved extent, with the retention analysis linked to broader allocation principles under section 3(3) and the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963. On that reasoning, the disputed extent was treated as within the permissible limit, subject to ceiling-based adjustment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Aug 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168139</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>