https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289679 A statutory forfeiture under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act was upheld where an invalid transfer triggered reversion of the land and the forfeiture operated as a consequence authorised by law, not as an unconstitutional acquisition without compensation under Article 31(2). By contrast, the attempted forfeiture of the purchase money, and its recovery as arrears of land revenue, was invalid because the statute did not clearly prohibit the purchaser's act or provide a complete basis for penal forfeiture; the money was treated as belonging to the purchaser on failure of consideration. The challenge therefore succeeded only in relation to the money forfeiture. en-us Wed, 18 Mar 1959 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Jul 2021 14:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289679 A statutory forfeiture under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act was upheld where an invalid transfer triggered reversion of the land and the forfeiture operated as a consequence authorised by law, not as an unconstitutional acquisition without compensation under Article 31(2). By contrast, the attempted forfeiture of the purchase money, and its recovery as arrears of land revenue, was invalid because the statute did not clearly prohibit the purchaser's act or provide a complete basis for penal forfeiture; the money was treated as belonging to the purchaser on failure of consideration. The challenge therefore succeeded only in relation to the money forfeiture. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 18 Mar 1959 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289679