<?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>Section 55 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 was held not to bar joint bhumidhars from partitioning land by bona fide family settlement or mutual compromise. The Court read the provision as permissive, because the word &quot;may&quot; gives a right to sue for partition but does not make that route exclusive or exclude amicable partition by agreement. The statutory scheme was harmonised with the policy favouring family arrangements, and anti-fragmentation provisions were not treated as defeating a valid inter se partition. The challenge therefore failed, and the family-settlement-based partition and resulting mutation were upheld in principle.</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>Section 55 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 was held not to bar joint bhumidhars from partitioning land by bona fide family settlement or mutual compromise. The Court read the provision as permissive, because the word &quot;may&quot; gives a right to sue for partition but does not make that route exclusive or exclude amicable partition by agreement. The statutory scheme was harmonised with the policy favouring family arrangements, and anti-fragmentation provisions were not treated as defeating a valid inter se partition. The challenge therefore failed, and the family-settlement-based partition and resulting mutation were upheld in principle.</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>