<?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>1953 (8) TMI 30 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287104</link>
    <description>A gift deed executed and accepted earlier prevailed over a later sale deed because, under Section 47 of the Registration Act, registration did not defer its operative date; the bank also failed to prove the elements required for protection as a transferee under Section 41 of the Transfer of Property Act, so it could not defeat the gifted share. A Hindu widow who remarried was not shown to have remarried under any proved ancient custom exempting her from forfeiture under Section 2 of the Hindu Widows&#039; Remarriage Act, 1856, so she failed to establish title to the remaining inherited share. The earlier gift was upheld to that extent, and relief for the balance was denied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 1953 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Mar 2020 13:30:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=608561" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1953 (8) TMI 30 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287104</link>
      <description>A gift deed executed and accepted earlier prevailed over a later sale deed because, under Section 47 of the Registration Act, registration did not defer its operative date; the bank also failed to prove the elements required for protection as a transferee under Section 41 of the Transfer of Property Act, so it could not defeat the gifted share. A Hindu widow who remarried was not shown to have remarried under any proved ancient custom exempting her from forfeiture under Section 2 of the Hindu Widows&#039; Remarriage Act, 1856, so she failed to establish title to the remaining inherited share. The earlier gift was upheld to that extent, and relief for the balance was denied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 1953 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287104</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>