https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182482 A mortgage deed executed in favour of a minor was treated as void for want of contractual competency, and the document's terms did not disclose delivery of possession, an obligation to deliver possession, or appropriation of rents and profits, so it could not be treated as a usufructuary mortgage. On the same facts, a claim to deemed tenancy under the Kerala Land Reforms Act failed because possession was not shown to arise from a valid usufructuary mortgage or other statutory basis. Mere factual occupation, without proof of a legally effective mortgage arrangement supporting the claim, was insufficient for a purchase certificate. en-us Fri, 25 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 May 2016 23:00:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182482 A mortgage deed executed in favour of a minor was treated as void for want of contractual competency, and the document's terms did not disclose delivery of possession, an obligation to deliver possession, or appropriation of rents and profits, so it could not be treated as a usufructuary mortgage. On the same facts, a claim to deemed tenancy under the Kerala Land Reforms Act failed because possession was not shown to arise from a valid usufructuary mortgage or other statutory basis. Mere factual occupation, without proof of a legally effective mortgage arrangement supporting the claim, was insufficient for a purchase certificate. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 25 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182482