<?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>2019 (8) TMI 1937 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464347</link>
    <description>A ryotwari patta granted under the Tamil Nadu Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act was held invalid where the land had already been taken over by the Government, later acquired, and treated as Industrial Estate in revenue records. The applicants relied on an unregistered document, failed to produce reliable title material, and suppressed the acquisition and land-status facts before the settlement authority; the cancellation of the patta was therefore justified. A revision challenging that order was also not barred by limitation because fraud and suppression went to the root of the authority&#039;s action. The writ petition failed and the impugned cancellation order was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Oct 2025 19:10:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=860007" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (8) TMI 1937 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464347</link>
      <description>A ryotwari patta granted under the Tamil Nadu Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act was held invalid where the land had already been taken over by the Government, later acquired, and treated as Industrial Estate in revenue records. The applicants relied on an unregistered document, failed to produce reliable title material, and suppressed the acquisition and land-status facts before the settlement authority; the cancellation of the patta was therefore justified. A revision challenging that order was also not barred by limitation because fraud and suppression went to the root of the authority&#039;s action. The writ petition failed and the impugned cancellation order was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464347</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>