<?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>1969 (10) TMI 71 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168863</link>
    <description>A statutory bar on civil court jurisdiction does not protect a rent-fixing notification made without relevant evidence or proper factual inquiry. The scheme required the Special Officer to determine fair and equitable rent on the basis of relevant material, and the Government&#039;s action had to conform to that recommendation process. A determination founded only on an irrelevant settlement-register entry for another village was treated as outside the Act and contrary to basic judicial procedure. Civil courts were therefore competent to examine the notification, which was held not to enjoy the statute&#039;s exclusion of review and was liable to be struck down.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2015 12:08:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=380212" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1969 (10) TMI 71 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168863</link>
      <description>A statutory bar on civil court jurisdiction does not protect a rent-fixing notification made without relevant evidence or proper factual inquiry. The scheme required the Special Officer to determine fair and equitable rent on the basis of relevant material, and the Government&#039;s action had to conform to that recommendation process. A determination founded only on an irrelevant settlement-register entry for another village was treated as outside the Act and contrary to basic judicial procedure. Civil courts were therefore competent to examine the notification, which was held not to enjoy the statute&#039;s exclusion of review and was liable to be struck down.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168863</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>