https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312578 Evacuee or composite status did not by itself exclude land from acquisition under the 1965 Section 4 notification, because no express or necessary exclusion could be implied and vesting in the Custodian did not make the land Central Government property. On that basis, the acquisition was not invalid merely for want of exemption. Khasra Nos. 321 and 322 were treated as composite properties until 16 May 1968 and remained within the notification, so the respondents were entitled to additional compensation as directed. The remaining khasras were remitted to the High Court because their composite status, earlier acquisition, and title position required fresh factual determination. en-us Wed, 08 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Feb 2024 12:10:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312578 Evacuee or composite status did not by itself exclude land from acquisition under the 1965 Section 4 notification, because no express or necessary exclusion could be implied and vesting in the Custodian did not make the land Central Government property. On that basis, the acquisition was not invalid merely for want of exemption. Khasra Nos. 321 and 322 were treated as composite properties until 16 May 1968 and remained within the notification, so the respondents were entitled to additional compensation as directed. The remaining khasras were remitted to the High Court because their composite status, earlier acquisition, and title position required fresh factual determination. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 08 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312578