https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183404 Claims to sirdari rights by adverse possession were rejected because the occupiers had not advanced that plea before the consolidation authorities or the High Court, and they could not rely on an asami status they simultaneously disowned. The 1958 Amendment Act was treated as retrospective from 1 July 1952 by virtue of its deeming provision, so the relevant succession rules applied and the respondents, as sisters' sons of the last male tenure holder, were entitled to succeed. The civil court's finding that it lacked jurisdiction over ejectment of asamis was a binding jurisdictional fact in the consolidation proceedings, while the declaratory relief claimed was not within the barred categories. en-us Wed, 26 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Jun 2016 16:07:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183404 Claims to sirdari rights by adverse possession were rejected because the occupiers had not advanced that plea before the consolidation authorities or the High Court, and they could not rely on an asami status they simultaneously disowned. The 1958 Amendment Act was treated as retrospective from 1 July 1952 by virtue of its deeming provision, so the relevant succession rules applied and the respondents, as sisters' sons of the last male tenure holder, were entitled to succeed. The civil court's finding that it lacked jurisdiction over ejectment of asamis was a binding jurisdictional fact in the consolidation proceedings, while the declaratory relief claimed was not within the barred categories. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 26 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183404