<?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>2026 (6) TMI 1371 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793990</link>
    <description>A civil suit seeking to declare a sale deed null and void for alleged FEMA contravention was not maintainable where the statutory authorities under FEMA had already adjudicated the breach and imposed penalty, because the civil court cannot decide a matter assigned to the Act&#039;s self-contained mechanism. The court also held that a FEMA violation does not, by itself, render a sale void under Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act or Section 6(h) of the Transfer of Property Act; in the absence of confiscation, the transaction was not shown to be forbidden by law. The partition decree was sustained for ancestral properties, but declaration and consequential reliefs concerning the sale transaction were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2026 08:33:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=908967" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (6) TMI 1371 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793990</link>
      <description>A civil suit seeking to declare a sale deed null and void for alleged FEMA contravention was not maintainable where the statutory authorities under FEMA had already adjudicated the breach and imposed penalty, because the civil court cannot decide a matter assigned to the Act&#039;s self-contained mechanism. The court also held that a FEMA violation does not, by itself, render a sale void under Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act or Section 6(h) of the Transfer of Property Act; in the absence of confiscation, the transaction was not shown to be forbidden by law. The partition decree was sustained for ancestral properties, but declaration and consequential reliefs concerning the sale transaction were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793990</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>