https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193860 Under SAFEMA, once property is validly forfeited under Section 7(3), it vests in the Central Government free from all encumbrances, and subordinate tenancy or leasehold claims do not survive. The Court distinguished forfeiture under SAFEMA from compulsory purchase under the Income-tax Act, holding that occupancy claims cannot persist without a lawful grant from the competent authority. It further held that, after forfeiture has attained finality, Section 19 authorises possession to be taken without a separate hearing on extinguished tenancy claims and without resort to the Public Premises Eviction law. The possession notice challenge therefore failed. en-us Wed, 11 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Aug 2017 16:01:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193860 Under SAFEMA, once property is validly forfeited under Section 7(3), it vests in the Central Government free from all encumbrances, and subordinate tenancy or leasehold claims do not survive. The Court distinguished forfeiture under SAFEMA from compulsory purchase under the Income-tax Act, holding that occupancy claims cannot persist without a lawful grant from the competent authority. It further held that, after forfeiture has attained finality, Section 19 authorises possession to be taken without a separate hearing on extinguished tenancy claims and without resort to the Public Premises Eviction law. The possession notice challenge therefore failed. Case-Laws FEMA Wed, 11 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193860