<?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>1924 (10) TMI 3 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299574</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the lower courts&#039; decisions on the issues of the benami transaction, adverse possession, and the maintainability of the suit. It dismissed the second appeal and the memorandum of objections, confirming that the sale to Hampayya was not benami, the adverse possession claim was not valid, and the present suit was maintainable despite a previous court order. The plaintiffs were allowed to proceed with their claim for a declaration of title to the suit lands.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 1924 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Dec 2021 12:36:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=664667" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1924 (10) TMI 3 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299574</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the lower courts&#039; decisions on the issues of the benami transaction, adverse possession, and the maintainability of the suit. It dismissed the second appeal and the memorandum of objections, confirming that the sale to Hampayya was not benami, the adverse possession claim was not valid, and the present suit was maintainable despite a previous court order. The plaintiffs were allowed to proceed with their claim for a declaration of title to the suit lands.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 1924 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299574</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>