https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303825 The definition of "land" in Section 2(f) included homestead, but the ceiling provision in Section 4, as amended, omitted homestead from the land to be counted. In construing this expropriatory statute strictly, the court treated the charging section as controlling and held that a definition clause could not override a repugnant operative provision. The legislative deletion of homestead from Section 4 could not be restored by interpretation, so homestead land situated within a municipal area was excluded from ceiling computation and the impugned orders were unsustainable. en-us Fri, 21 May 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Aug 2022 14:31:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303825 The definition of "land" in Section 2(f) included homestead, but the ceiling provision in Section 4, as amended, omitted homestead from the land to be counted. In construing this expropriatory statute strictly, the court treated the charging section as controlling and held that a definition clause could not override a repugnant operative provision. The legislative deletion of homestead from Section 4 could not be restored by interpretation, so homestead land situated within a municipal area was excluded from ceiling computation and the impugned orders were unsustainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 21 May 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303825