https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290954 Underground rights did not pass under the original village grant to the mansabdar because there was no evidence that the grant included mineral or subsoil rights, and no presumption could be made that all rights of the grantor transferred in the absence of express material terms. The document also states that Indian grants are not governed by the English-law assumption that a grantor passes everything he owns. On second appeal, a gross or erroneous finding of fact was not treated as a sufficient ground for reassessment, so the concurrent factual finding was left undisturbed and the plaintiff failed. en-us Fri, 15 Mar 1929 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Oct 2020 11:39:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290954 Underground rights did not pass under the original village grant to the mansabdar because there was no evidence that the grant included mineral or subsoil rights, and no presumption could be made that all rights of the grantor transferred in the absence of express material terms. The document also states that Indian grants are not governed by the English-law assumption that a grantor passes everything he owns. On second appeal, a gross or erroneous finding of fact was not treated as a sufficient ground for reassessment, so the concurrent factual finding was left undisturbed and the plaintiff failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 15 Mar 1929 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290954