<?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>1957 (10) TMI 39 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187933</link>
    <description>A public auction of salt pans does not complete a transfer of property merely because the highest bid is accepted at auction; under the applicable rules, transfer depends on bid approval, payment of the balance price, and issue of a sale certificate. Until those conditions are satisfied, ownership remains untransferred. Section 29 protection against eviction applies only where the property has already been transferred under the Act, so a person in possession cannot claim that statutory safeguard before completion of transfer. On the facts stated, the eviction challenge failed because no completed transfer had occurred and the section 29 protection had not arisen.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Oct 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2016 18:21:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=447473" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1957 (10) TMI 39 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187933</link>
      <description>A public auction of salt pans does not complete a transfer of property merely because the highest bid is accepted at auction; under the applicable rules, transfer depends on bid approval, payment of the balance price, and issue of a sale certificate. Until those conditions are satisfied, ownership remains untransferred. Section 29 protection against eviction applies only where the property has already been transferred under the Act, so a person in possession cannot claim that statutory safeguard before completion of transfer. On the facts stated, the eviction challenge failed because no completed transfer had occurred and the section 29 protection had not arisen.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Oct 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187933</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>