Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.51 seconds)The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882
The Registration Act, 1908
M.P. Abolition of Proprietary Rights (Estates, Mahals, Alienated Lands) Act, 1950
The General Clauses Act, 1897
Chhotabrai Jethabai Patel And Co vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh(And Other ... on 22 December, 1952
The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that his
client's rights flowed out of a contract and so, relying on
Chhotebhai Jethabhai Patel's case(2), he contended that he
was entitled to a writ. As a matter of fact, the rights in
the earlier case were held to flow from a licence and not
from a contract simpliciter (see page 483) but it is true
that the learned Judges held that a writ petition lay.
Section 3 in The Registration Act, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in M.P. Abolition of Proprietary Rights (Estates, Mahals, Alienated Lands) Act, 1950 [Entire Act]
Ananda Behera And Another vs The State Of Orissa And Another on 27 October, 1955
The result is that, though such trees as can be regarded as
standing timber at the date of the document, both because of
their size and girth and also because of the intention to
fell at an early date, would be moveable, property for the
purposes of the Transfer of Property and Registration Acts,
the remaining trees that are also covered by the grant will
be immoveable property, and as the total value is Rs.
26,000, the deed requires registration. Being unregistered,
it passes no title or interest and, therefore, as in Ananda
Behera's case (1) the petitioner has no fundamental right
which she can enforce.