cover image: Council of State Debates  Thursday  26th September  1929  Official Report

Premium

20.500.12592/sc611g

Council of State Debates Thursday 26th September 1929 Official Report

1929

It further provides for the validity of a direction as to accumulation for a certain period and for certain purposes for the amendment of the provisions regarding sale without the intervention of the Court the modification of the law of merger " the extension of the doctrine of subrogation and the formal execution of leases both by the lessor and the lessee. [...] It is stated in the Notes on Clauses which have been circulated to Members that the word " Hindu " is not necessary here because the only points of difference between the Hindu Law and the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act contained in Chapter II have now been changed and the law is the same in the Hindu law os in the Transfer of Property Act. [...] The language used might be the same but according to the present decisions of the Judicial Committee the interpretation put on that deed will be that it was the intention of the donor to create in favour of the nephew an absolute stake in the prperty but only a limited stake in favour of the widow. [...] If the word " Hindu " is retained in the section then the position would be that if at any later stage any proposal is made to modify any of the provisions of the second Chapter of the Transfer of Property Act and if that provision militates against the provisions of Hindu law then that will be brought directly to the notice of the Hind us in India whether that provision is necessary or wante [...] Probably that is the intention of the framers of the Bill but I think that that is not clear from the wording of the Explanation and I would adopt the words of the Honourable the Law Member in saying that we (in the Legislature) ought to make the law as clear and unambiguous as possible.
government politics public policy
Pages
65
Published in
India
SARF Document ID
sarf.100003
Segment Pages Author Actions
Cover
i-i unknown view
Erratum
i-i unknown view
Council of State Debates Friday 27th September 1929 Official Report
253-315 unknown view