<?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>1991 (5) TMI 252 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171567</link>
    <description>Deemed purchaser rights under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 crystallise on tillers&#039; day and cannot be retrospectively displaced by the second proviso to section 88(1)(b) unless its conditions are met. The proviso protects only valid and bona fide transfers or acquisitions within its specified scope; it cannot nullify a vested tenancy right through a later notification. Under Hindu joint family law, a junior member cannot ordinarily alienate joint family property as manager during the karta&#039;s lifetime without lawful authority. A sale by such a member, without competent-court authority in alleged lunacy, is not a valid and bona fide transfer capable of defeating the tenant&#039;s statutory purchase rights.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 May 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2025 15:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=391190" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (5) TMI 252 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171567</link>
      <description>Deemed purchaser rights under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 crystallise on tillers&#039; day and cannot be retrospectively displaced by the second proviso to section 88(1)(b) unless its conditions are met. The proviso protects only valid and bona fide transfers or acquisitions within its specified scope; it cannot nullify a vested tenancy right through a later notification. Under Hindu joint family law, a junior member cannot ordinarily alienate joint family property as manager during the karta&#039;s lifetime without lawful authority. A sale by such a member, without competent-court authority in alleged lunacy, is not a valid and bona fide transfer capable of defeating the tenant&#039;s statutory purchase rights.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 May 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171567</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>