<?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>1979 (12) TMI 165 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312381</link>
    <description>A forest sale notice issued by or under the authority of a Forest Officer can create a statutory liability for deficiency on re-auction, and section 82 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 permits recovery of that deficiency as arrears of land revenue even without a contract complying with Article 299 of the Constitution. The 10% earnest money condition was treated as waivable for the Government&#039;s benefit by the authorised auction officer, so bids were not invalid for non-deposit of that amount. The 25% deposit requirement arose only after acceptance of the bid and was not a condition precedent to bid validity. Recovery under section 155(b) of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1958 was not available absent an Article 299-compliant contract.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Feb 2024 18:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=743654" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (12) TMI 165 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312381</link>
      <description>A forest sale notice issued by or under the authority of a Forest Officer can create a statutory liability for deficiency on re-auction, and section 82 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 permits recovery of that deficiency as arrears of land revenue even without a contract complying with Article 299 of the Constitution. The 10% earnest money condition was treated as waivable for the Government&#039;s benefit by the authorised auction officer, so bids were not invalid for non-deposit of that amount. The 25% deposit requirement arose only after acceptance of the bid and was not a condition precedent to bid validity. Recovery under section 155(b) of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1958 was not available absent an Article 299-compliant contract.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312381</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>