<?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>2015 (9) TMI 1756 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312589</link>
    <description>Section 12 notification under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 extinguishes the evacuee&#039;s right, title and interest and vests the property absolutely in the Central Government, so the land thereafter no longer retains the character of evacuee property for the exemption in a Section 4 acquisition notification. Land vested in the Central Government may still be acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 where an auction purchaser has been put in provisional possession, because such possession creates an encumbrance or possessory right rather than full title. The stated result is that the acquisition proceedings were valid, while the separate Section 24(2) claim was left for the appropriate forum.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Feb 2024 18:11:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=744887" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (9) TMI 1756 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312589</link>
      <description>Section 12 notification under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 extinguishes the evacuee&#039;s right, title and interest and vests the property absolutely in the Central Government, so the land thereafter no longer retains the character of evacuee property for the exemption in a Section 4 acquisition notification. Land vested in the Central Government may still be acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 where an auction purchaser has been put in provisional possession, because such possession creates an encumbrance or possessory right rather than full title. The stated result is that the acquisition proceedings were valid, while the separate Section 24(2) claim was left for the appropriate forum.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312589</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>