<?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>1951 (10) TMI 29 - HYDERABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289108</link>
    <description>Under the Hyderabad Transfer of Property Act, a transaction among Mohammedans could still rest on an oral gift, and writing it down did not necessarily make registration compulsory. An unregistered document did not lose all evidentiary value merely because it could not operate as a registrable instrument. The document could still be admitted for a limited collateral purpose, and an unregistered marriage certificate was therefore not wholly inadmissible.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Oct 1951 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2020 14:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=617425" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1951 (10) TMI 29 - HYDERABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289108</link>
      <description>Under the Hyderabad Transfer of Property Act, a transaction among Mohammedans could still rest on an oral gift, and writing it down did not necessarily make registration compulsory. An unregistered document did not lose all evidentiary value merely because it could not operate as a registrable instrument. The document could still be admitted for a limited collateral purpose, and an unregistered marriage certificate was therefore not wholly inadmissible.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Oct 1951 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289108</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>