<?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 (12) TMI 84 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189992</link>
    <description>The High Court directed the appellants to hand over possession of lands to the respondent in a dispute involving ownership of specific survey numbers assigned to family deities. The court recognized the deities as private deities of the respondent, who had filed civil applications seeking possession after the Government refused to hand over the lands. Despite the cancellation of a notification declaring the temples as public trusts, the court rejected the appellants&#039; belated counter-affidavit and accepted the respondent&#039;s statements as prima facie evidence of his right to possession, leading to the dismissal of the appeals in favor of the respondent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2017 16:57:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=456747" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1972 (12) TMI 84 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189992</link>
      <description>The High Court directed the appellants to hand over possession of lands to the respondent in a dispute involving ownership of specific survey numbers assigned to family deities. The court recognized the deities as private deities of the respondent, who had filed civil applications seeking possession after the Government refused to hand over the lands. Despite the cancellation of a notification declaring the temples as public trusts, the court rejected the appellants&#039; belated counter-affidavit and accepted the respondent&#039;s statements as prima facie evidence of his right to possession, leading to the dismissal of the appeals in favor of the respondent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189992</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>