https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173866 Government-grant land remained subject to ceiling legislation because the grant conditions barred uncontrolled transfer and overrode local tenancy claims. Proceedings against the farm were valid as they reached the real holder in substance, and post-cut-off transfers were ignored because the concurrent findings showed they were not bona fide, were arranged in anticipation of the amendment, and were not supported by proper consideration or independent accounts. The earlier exclusion of 250 acres for the school did not create res judicata, as the prior order rested on a mistaken legal premise and the later ceiling proceedings proceeded on the true ownership position. Non-hearing of transferees caused no prejudice, but the lump-sum costs order was treated as an impermissible damages award and set aside. en-us Fri, 20 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Dec 2015 10:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173866 Government-grant land remained subject to ceiling legislation because the grant conditions barred uncontrolled transfer and overrode local tenancy claims. Proceedings against the farm were valid as they reached the real holder in substance, and post-cut-off transfers were ignored because the concurrent findings showed they were not bona fide, were arranged in anticipation of the amendment, and were not supported by proper consideration or independent accounts. The earlier exclusion of 250 acres for the school did not create res judicata, as the prior order rested on a mistaken legal premise and the later ceiling proceedings proceeded on the true ownership position. Non-hearing of transferees caused no prejudice, but the lump-sum costs order was treated as an impermissible damages award and set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 20 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173866