<?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>1921 (2) TMI 2 - PRIVY COUNCIL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275596</link>
    <description>The case involved determining the rightful successor to the ancestral zamindari of Aghori-Barhar under Mitakshara law. The court established that the property was ancestral, not self-acquired, and held as joint family property despite being impartible. Precedents confirmed that succession in impartible estates follows the rule of survivorship. The eldest of the senior branch was designated as the successor, dismissing the appeal and affirming the lower courts&#039; decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Feb 1921 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2018 15:20:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=537628" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1921 (2) TMI 2 - PRIVY COUNCIL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275596</link>
      <description>The case involved determining the rightful successor to the ancestral zamindari of Aghori-Barhar under Mitakshara law. The court established that the property was ancestral, not self-acquired, and held as joint family property despite being impartible. Precedents confirmed that succession in impartible estates follows the rule of survivorship. The eldest of the senior branch was designated as the successor, dismissing the appeal and affirming the lower courts&#039; decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Feb 1921 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275596</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>