https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292730 Ryoti land could be validly converted into private or kamatam land before the Estates Land Act commenced, because the Act was not read as retrospective and Section 185 was treated as a rule of proof rather than a substantive prohibition. On the evidence, the suit lands had in fact been absorbed into the zamindar's kamatam and long treated as private land under arrangements negativing ryoti rights. When the first defendant entered possession, the lands retained that private character, so no occupancy rights as a ryot arose. en-us Tue, 04 May 1926 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Jan 2021 12:37:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292730 Ryoti land could be validly converted into private or kamatam land before the Estates Land Act commenced, because the Act was not read as retrospective and Section 185 was treated as a rule of proof rather than a substantive prohibition. On the evidence, the suit lands had in fact been absorbed into the zamindar's kamatam and long treated as private land under arrangements negativing ryoti rights. When the first defendant entered possession, the lands retained that private character, so no occupancy rights as a ryot arose. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 04 May 1926 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292730