https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297919 A prior proceeding under Section 77 of the Indian Registration Act was treated as barring a fresh challenge to the genuineness and contractual conformity of the leases on res judicata, because those matters had already been determined and could not be reopened by an inconsistent plea. The claim for mesne profits was treated as within limitation under Article 109 of the First Schedule to the Indian Limitation Act, since time ran only from the date the registered leases became operative against the property. The second defendant was regarded as liable for mesne profits during his possession, but that liability ended when a receiver was appointed, as the receiver's possession became that of the Court. en-us Mon, 31 Dec 1923 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 May 2026 11:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297919 A prior proceeding under Section 77 of the Indian Registration Act was treated as barring a fresh challenge to the genuineness and contractual conformity of the leases on res judicata, because those matters had already been determined and could not be reopened by an inconsistent plea. The claim for mesne profits was treated as within limitation under Article 109 of the First Schedule to the Indian Limitation Act, since time ran only from the date the registered leases became operative against the property. The second defendant was regarded as liable for mesne profits during his possession, but that liability ended when a receiver was appointed, as the receiver's possession became that of the Court. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 31 Dec 1923 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297919