<?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>1947 (2) TMI 19 - Bombay High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172510</link>
    <description>A provincial entry relating to land was construed broadly to include mortgages of land as incidental and ancillary matters, not merely agricultural land in a narrow sense. On that construction, the Punjab Restitution of Mortgaged Lands Act, 1938 was held to fall within the Punjab Legislature&#039;s competence because the Act was confined to agricultural land and connected rights in or over land, while its procedural provisions were treated as ancillary to land matters. Since the statute was within the provincial field, the Concurrent List was not attracted and no issue of repugnancy arose. The Act was therefore valid and not ultra vires.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 1942 00:00:00 +0630</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Mar 2018 17:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=394489" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1947 (2) TMI 19 - Bombay High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172510</link>
      <description>A provincial entry relating to land was construed broadly to include mortgages of land as incidental and ancillary matters, not merely agricultural land in a narrow sense. On that construction, the Punjab Restitution of Mortgaged Lands Act, 1938 was held to fall within the Punjab Legislature&#039;s competence because the Act was confined to agricultural land and connected rights in or over land, while its procedural provisions were treated as ancillary to land matters. Since the statute was within the provincial field, the Concurrent List was not attracted and no issue of repugnancy arose. The Act was therefore valid and not ultra vires.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 1942 00:00:00 +0630</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172510</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>