https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35484 A compulsory purchase order under section 269UD(1) could not be sustained where the purported vendor held only a 50% share in the flat and had no authority to transfer the entire property without the co-owner's consent. The order was expressly made subject to the result of pending civil proceedings, and those proceedings ended in a consent decree confirming the co-owner's 50% share. The authority was a party to the suit, raised no objection to the consent decree, and the consent terms were found not to be fraudulent. In these circumstances, the purchase order was unsustainable and liable to be quashed. en-us Mon, 08 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35484 A compulsory purchase order under section 269UD(1) could not be sustained where the purported vendor held only a 50% share in the flat and had no authority to transfer the entire property without the co-owner's consent. The order was expressly made subject to the result of pending civil proceedings, and those proceedings ended in a consent decree confirming the co-owner's 50% share. The authority was a party to the suit, raised no objection to the consent decree, and the consent terms were found not to be fraudulent. In these circumstances, the purchase order was unsustainable and liable to be quashed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 08 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35484