https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287354 Fraudulent or collusive re-entry and sub-lease could not defeat an execution purchaser's title where the surrounding conduct showed a sham arrangement and wrongful possession. Although the plaintiff took subject to existing landlord's charge decrees, the defendants could not rely on those charges to justify continued possession because their entry was not lawfully derived and was itself wrongful. A wrongdoer in possession was also denied compensation for improvements, though removal of machinery was permitted. The result was that the plaintiff's right to recover possession was upheld, with only a brief postponement of delivery. en-us Fri, 22 May 1936 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Jul 2021 16:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287354 Fraudulent or collusive re-entry and sub-lease could not defeat an execution purchaser's title where the surrounding conduct showed a sham arrangement and wrongful possession. Although the plaintiff took subject to existing landlord's charge decrees, the defendants could not rely on those charges to justify continued possession because their entry was not lawfully derived and was itself wrongful. A wrongdoer in possession was also denied compensation for improvements, though removal of machinery was permitted. The result was that the plaintiff's right to recover possession was upheld, with only a brief postponement of delivery. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 22 May 1936 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287354