<?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>2009 (7) TMI 1291 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187212</link>
    <description>Once possession is taken under the urgency powers in Section 17(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the land vests absolutely in the Government free from encumbrances and Section 48 is no longer available for withdrawal from acquisition. The record showed actual, not merely symbolic, possession, supported by the possession certificate, award proceedings, communications, and payment-related entries, together with the presumption attached to official acts. The writ court was also competent to decide the possession dispute on documents and affidavits without oral evidence. On that basis, the challenge to the acquisition failed and the appeals were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Oct 2023 10:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=444618" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (7) TMI 1291 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187212</link>
      <description>Once possession is taken under the urgency powers in Section 17(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the land vests absolutely in the Government free from encumbrances and Section 48 is no longer available for withdrawal from acquisition. The record showed actual, not merely symbolic, possession, supported by the possession certificate, award proceedings, communications, and payment-related entries, together with the presumption attached to official acts. The writ court was also competent to decide the possession dispute on documents and affidavits without oral evidence. On that basis, the challenge to the acquisition failed and the appeals were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187212</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>