<?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>1998 (3) TMI 709 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296093</link>
    <description>A pre-Act oral family arrangement and partition can be recognised without registration where the arrangement is proved by contemporaneous correspondence, possession, revenue receipts and later conduct, because such an arrangement records antecedent title and severance of joint status rather than operating as a conveyance. On that basis, the court held that the family division had been completed in substance before the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978 came into force, so the statutory restrictions on transfer of excess vacant land could not defeat it. The authorities were therefore bound to take the partition into account when computing excess vacant land.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Jul 2021 12:27:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=648635" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (3) TMI 709 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296093</link>
      <description>A pre-Act oral family arrangement and partition can be recognised without registration where the arrangement is proved by contemporaneous correspondence, possession, revenue receipts and later conduct, because such an arrangement records antecedent title and severance of joint status rather than operating as a conveyance. On that basis, the court held that the family division had been completed in substance before the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978 came into force, so the statutory restrictions on transfer of excess vacant land could not defeat it. The authorities were therefore bound to take the partition into account when computing excess vacant land.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Benami Property</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296093</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>