<?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>1972 (2) TMI 100 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184137</link>
    <description>Exemption from acquisition under Section 56 of the Punjab Towns Improvement Act, 1922 is available only where land included in a sanctioned scheme is shown to be unnecessary for execution of the scheme. An orchard or fruit trees, by themselves, do not create a right to abandonment unless that statutory condition is met. The applicants failed to establish that their land had been found unnecessary for the scheme, so no enforceable claim to exemption arose. Article 14 could not be used to compel exemption in the absence of the statutory preconditions, and prior exemption of other orchards did not confer a legal entitlement. Section 43 was only enabling and did not require alteration of the scheme.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Feb 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2016 14:18:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=433347" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1972 (2) TMI 100 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184137</link>
      <description>Exemption from acquisition under Section 56 of the Punjab Towns Improvement Act, 1922 is available only where land included in a sanctioned scheme is shown to be unnecessary for execution of the scheme. An orchard or fruit trees, by themselves, do not create a right to abandonment unless that statutory condition is met. The applicants failed to establish that their land had been found unnecessary for the scheme, so no enforceable claim to exemption arose. Article 14 could not be used to compel exemption in the absence of the statutory preconditions, and prior exemption of other orchards did not confer a legal entitlement. Section 43 was only enabling and did not require alteration of the scheme.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Feb 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184137</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>