https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184448 Confirmed auction sale under the evacuee property scheme was treated as conferring protected title once completed in accordance with the statutory procedure, and such title could not be displaced by later allotment action unless the sale was set aside as provided by the Rules. Rule 34C, however, required proof of continuous sub-lessee possession from 1 January 1956, and the record showed disputed possession and conflicting materials. Faced with competing equities between a bona fide auction purchaser and a claimant asserting a statutory allotment right, the Court adopted an equitable resolution and ordered the land to be divided, protecting both claims in part. en-us Fri, 21 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Jul 2016 18:20:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184448 Confirmed auction sale under the evacuee property scheme was treated as conferring protected title once completed in accordance with the statutory procedure, and such title could not be displaced by later allotment action unless the sale was set aside as provided by the Rules. Rule 34C, however, required proof of continuous sub-lessee possession from 1 January 1956, and the record showed disputed possession and conflicting materials. Faced with competing equities between a bona fide auction purchaser and a claimant asserting a statutory allotment right, the Court adopted an equitable resolution and ordered the land to be divided, protecting both claims in part. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 21 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184448