https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313718 Admission to ryoti land was treated as creating statutory occupancy rights by operation of law, and the land was held to be ryoti on the facts showing agricultural use and liability to pay rent. That statutory result did not convert the letting into a lease for more than five years, so section 76 of the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1927 was not attracted. A suit by a landholder for arrears of rent and ejectment of a ryot lay exclusively before the Revenue Court under the Madras Estates Land Act, 1908, barring civil court cognizance. The cross-objection could not be decided once civil jurisdiction failed. en-us Thu, 09 May 1963 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Apr 2024 17:31:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313718 Admission to ryoti land was treated as creating statutory occupancy rights by operation of law, and the land was held to be ryoti on the facts showing agricultural use and liability to pay rent. That statutory result did not convert the letting into a lease for more than five years, so section 76 of the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1927 was not attracted. A suit by a landholder for arrears of rent and ejectment of a ryot lay exclusively before the Revenue Court under the Madras Estates Land Act, 1908, barring civil court cognizance. The cross-objection could not be decided once civil jurisdiction failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 09 May 1963 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313718