https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305365 Leasehold-to-freehold conversion under Clause 13 of the Conversion Scheme was unavailable because the applicant was neither the holder of a valid subsisting power of attorney nor otherwise vested with an enforceable legal right in the property. The decree for specific performance did not cure the absence of title or satisfy the scheme's requirement that the application be made by a person authorised by the lessee, sub-lessee or allottee and supported by proof of possession and the required linkage. The Supreme Court held that writ mandamus could not issue without an existing legal right, and the High Court's direction for conversion was unsustainable. The appeal succeeded and the conversion claim failed. en-us Tue, 24 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Dec 2022 06:11:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305365 Leasehold-to-freehold conversion under Clause 13 of the Conversion Scheme was unavailable because the applicant was neither the holder of a valid subsisting power of attorney nor otherwise vested with an enforceable legal right in the property. The decree for specific performance did not cure the absence of title or satisfy the scheme's requirement that the application be made by a person authorised by the lessee, sub-lessee or allottee and supported by proof of possession and the required linkage. The Supreme Court held that writ mandamus could not issue without an existing legal right, and the High Court's direction for conversion was unsustainable. The appeal succeeded and the conversion claim failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 24 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305365