<?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>2025 (3) TMI 423 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767037</link>
    <description>The SC dismissed the appeal concerning a plot sale in auction and leasehold rights acquisition through DDA agreement. The Court held that since no lease was executed by appellant in favor of M/s Mehta Constructions, no rights were created in their favor. The first respondent could only claim benefits available under the lease agreement if legally entitled. The HC correctly observed that auction did not constitute plot sale and appropriately declined to order unearned income payment from liquidation funds due to numerous pending claims. The first respondent cannot claim lessee status as no lease was executed, but appellant retains remedy to recover possession and unearned income against first respondent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2025 08:42:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=805277" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 423 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767037</link>
      <description>The SC dismissed the appeal concerning a plot sale in auction and leasehold rights acquisition through DDA agreement. The Court held that since no lease was executed by appellant in favor of M/s Mehta Constructions, no rights were created in their favor. The first respondent could only claim benefits available under the lease agreement if legally entitled. The HC correctly observed that auction did not constitute plot sale and appropriately declined to order unearned income payment from liquidation funds due to numerous pending claims. The first respondent cannot claim lessee status as no lease was executed, but appellant retains remedy to recover possession and unearned income against first respondent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767037</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>