Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 26 (0.59 seconds)

S.N. Banerji And The Kalyanpur Lime ... vs The Kuchwar Lime And Stone Company on 30 June, 1941

23. Their Lordships of the Privy Council again examined the nature of the equity of part performance (in Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act) in S. N. Banerji's case, AIR 1941 PC 128. The Secretary of State there granted to the Kuchawar Lime and Stone Company Limited quarrying leases for 20 years. The Company went in liquidation in 1933 and agreed with one Bose for the sale to him of the rights under the leases subject to the sanction of the Board of Revenue. The agreement was not registered. In 1934 the Government purported to forfeit the leases and gave permission to the appellant to enter and work the quarries, which they did. No formal lease to the appellants was executed. In September 1934, the respondent Company brought a suit against the Secretary of the State for a declaration that their leases had not been forfeited and for an injunction restraining the defendant from granting leases to the appellant or others. When the case came up before their Lordships on subsequent developments, they made the following observation regarding the scope of Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act.-
Bombay High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 18 - Full Document

Delhi Motor Company And Ors vs U.A. Basrurkar And Ors on 8 January, 1968

Following the decisions of their Lordships of the Privy Council in Probodh Kumar Das's case AIR 1940 PC 1 and of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Delhi Motor Co.'s case, AIR 1968 SC 794, their Lordships of the Gujarat High Court held that a transferee does not get any right under Section 53A to claim possession for he can only plead estoppel against the transferor in order to defend his possession. He cannot maintain any suit.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 62 - V Bhargava - Full Document
1   2 3 Next