https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183812 Under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, transfers made in breach of the ceiling restrictions were void ab initio, and later derivative transfers could not create a lawful title. On repeal, pending proceedings abated only where the State had not taken actual physical possession of the surplus land; deemed vesting and notices alone were insufficient. The Court also found that relief in writ jurisdiction was unavailable because the appellants had not produced complete sale deeds or pleadings to establish a valid title chain, and the surplus-declaration orders had already attained finality. The challenge therefore failed on the merits. en-us Thu, 16 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Sep 2023 13:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183812 Under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, transfers made in breach of the ceiling restrictions were void ab initio, and later derivative transfers could not create a lawful title. On repeal, pending proceedings abated only where the State had not taken actual physical possession of the surplus land; deemed vesting and notices alone were insufficient. The Court also found that relief in writ jurisdiction was unavailable because the appellants had not produced complete sale deeds or pleadings to establish a valid title chain, and the surplus-declaration orders had already attained finality. The challenge therefore failed on the merits. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 16 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183812