<?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>2011 (9) TMI 1233 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303277</link>
    <description>The court affirmed the validity of a family settlement among joint bhumidhars, dividing land holdings and subsequent mutation order, dismissing the appeal. It held that the Delhi Land Reforms Act does not prohibit such settlements, emphasizing the importance of family settlements in promoting harmony and avoiding litigation. The court cited judicial precedents supporting the enforcement of family settlements as a legitimate method of partition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2022 15:09:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=684788" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (9) TMI 1233 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303277</link>
      <description>The court affirmed the validity of a family settlement among joint bhumidhars, dividing land holdings and subsequent mutation order, dismissing the appeal. It held that the Delhi Land Reforms Act does not prohibit such settlements, emphasizing the importance of family settlements in promoting harmony and avoiding litigation. The court cited judicial precedents supporting the enforcement of family settlements as a legitimate method of partition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303277</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>