<?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>1981 (3) TMI 250 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168807</link>
    <description>A gift of land executed after 24 January 1971 could not claim protection under proviso (b) to section 5(6) of the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960, because the exception applies only to transfers made in good faith for adequate consideration through an irrevocable instrument and not for the benefit of the tenure-holder or family members. &quot;Adequate consideration&quot; was read in its legal sense as valuable, measurable consideration, and a gift under section 122 of the Transfer of Property Act is a gratuitous transfer without consideration. The burden of proving the exception remained on the claimant, and the gift had to be ignored for ceiling purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Feb 2025 13:01:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=379903" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1981 (3) TMI 250 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168807</link>
      <description>A gift of land executed after 24 January 1971 could not claim protection under proviso (b) to section 5(6) of the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960, because the exception applies only to transfers made in good faith for adequate consideration through an irrevocable instrument and not for the benefit of the tenure-holder or family members. &quot;Adequate consideration&quot; was read in its legal sense as valuable, measurable consideration, and a gift under section 122 of the Transfer of Property Act is a gratuitous transfer without consideration. The burden of proving the exception remained on the claimant, and the gift had to be ignored for ceiling purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168807</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>