https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461062 Section 46 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 was applied to protect temple property from loss through a caretaker's acts: where the land stood recorded in the name of the temple and the pujari was only a caretaker, his acquisition of khatedari rights was treated as fraudulent, void, and incapable of defeating the deity's title. The Court also rejected a hyper-technical objection to appealability and procedure, holding that procedural defects could not override substantial justice where the underlying entry was tainted and the revenue authorities had examined the matter on merits. The Board's interference was therefore unjustified, and the appellate order was restored. en-us Tue, 30 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Mar 2025 14:33:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461062 Section 46 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 was applied to protect temple property from loss through a caretaker's acts: where the land stood recorded in the name of the temple and the pujari was only a caretaker, his acquisition of khatedari rights was treated as fraudulent, void, and incapable of defeating the deity's title. The Court also rejected a hyper-technical objection to appealability and procedure, holding that procedural defects could not override substantial justice where the underlying entry was tainted and the revenue authorities had examined the matter on merits. The Board's interference was therefore unjustified, and the appellate order was restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 30 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461062