<?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>2019 (4) TMI 793 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378349</link>
    <description>A transaction evidenced by a sale deed and separate reconveyance agreement was treated as a mortgage by conditional sale because Section 37(a) of the Bengal Money-Lenders Act, 1940 overrides the proviso to Section 58(c) of the Transfer of Property Act and permits the condition to be read despite not being contained in the same document, especially where surrounding circumstances supported a loan-security arrangement. A suit seeking declaration and redemption fell within the Act because its definitions extend to redemption proceedings and suits substantially for recovery of a loan or enforcement of security. Section 37(a) was not inoperative in the State, as any inconsistency was saved by Presidential assent under Article 254(2).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Apr 2019 06:18:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=566824" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 793 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378349</link>
      <description>A transaction evidenced by a sale deed and separate reconveyance agreement was treated as a mortgage by conditional sale because Section 37(a) of the Bengal Money-Lenders Act, 1940 overrides the proviso to Section 58(c) of the Transfer of Property Act and permits the condition to be read despite not being contained in the same document, especially where surrounding circumstances supported a loan-security arrangement. A suit seeking declaration and redemption fell within the Act because its definitions extend to redemption proceedings and suits substantially for recovery of a loan or enforcement of security. Section 37(a) was not inoperative in the State, as any inconsistency was saved by Presidential assent under Article 254(2).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378349</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>