<?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>1947 (10) TMI 10 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200613</link>
    <description>A Court of Wards manager&#039;s settlement of estate lands was treated as valid where it was made in bona fide management of a large estate, secured surrender of a mokarrari claim in exchange for a cash-rent arrangement, and was found beneficial to the ward&#039;s estate. The appellate finding on benefit was treated as a factual determination not open to interference in second appeal. The manager was also held to have acted within delegated authority because the governing rules permitted settlement within the prescribed rental limit, and the settlement was executed by registered kabuliat as required. The settlement was therefore upheld as binding and not ultra vires.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 1947 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Apr 2018 14:21:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=516265" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1947 (10) TMI 10 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200613</link>
      <description>A Court of Wards manager&#039;s settlement of estate lands was treated as valid where it was made in bona fide management of a large estate, secured surrender of a mokarrari claim in exchange for a cash-rent arrangement, and was found beneficial to the ward&#039;s estate. The appellate finding on benefit was treated as a factual determination not open to interference in second appeal. The manager was also held to have acted within delegated authority because the governing rules permitted settlement within the prescribed rental limit, and the settlement was executed by registered kabuliat as required. The settlement was therefore upheld as binding and not ultra vires.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 1947 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200613</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>