<?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>1994 (5) TMI 291 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313387</link>
    <description>Letters of administration with the will annexed were treated as conclusive proof of the will&#039;s existence and genuineness, so the Development Authority could not conduct a parallel enquiry into the testamentary devolution or expand the lease covenants to demand unearned increase on transfer and mutation of leasehold rights. Because the lease deed did not authorise recovery of unearned increase where the property devolved under a valid will supported by such letters of administration, the demand for unearned increase and interest was invalid. The impugned communications were set aside, and the authority was required to transfer and mutate the leasehold rights without charging unearned increase.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Apr 2024 11:08:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=749727" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (5) TMI 291 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313387</link>
      <description>Letters of administration with the will annexed were treated as conclusive proof of the will&#039;s existence and genuineness, so the Development Authority could not conduct a parallel enquiry into the testamentary devolution or expand the lease covenants to demand unearned increase on transfer and mutation of leasehold rights. Because the lease deed did not authorise recovery of unearned increase where the property devolved under a valid will supported by such letters of administration, the demand for unearned increase and interest was invalid. The impugned communications were set aside, and the authority was required to transfer and mutate the leasehold rights without charging unearned increase.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313387</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>