B. P. SINHA, J. L. KAPUR, K. N. WANCHOO, K. SUBBA RAO, P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR
Gangadharrao Narayanrao Mujlimdar: Trimbak Laxman Dabir: Laxman Harishastri Garge: Babubhai Gulabbhai Nagarsheth: Sardar Mansinhji Bhasaheb: Laxminarayan Devasthan – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bombay – Respondent
Judgment
WANCHOO, J. : These six appeals on a certificate granted by the Bombay High Court raise a common question as to the constitutionality of the Bombay Personal Inams Abolition Act, No XLII of 1953, (hereinafter called the Act) and will be disposed of by this judgment. The appellants hold personal inams which are covered by Bombay Acts Nos. II and VII of 1863. The Act was attacked on a number of grounds in the High Court of which only two have been urged before us, namely, (i) that the property which has been dealt with under the Act is not an estate and (ii) that no compensation has been provided in the Act for taking away the property of the appellants. The writ petitions were opposed by the State of Bombay and the main contention on its behalf was that the Act was protected under Art. 31-A of the Constitution.
2. Before we deal with the two points raised before us, we should like briefly to refer to the rights which holders of personal inams had by virtue of Bombay Acts Nos. II and VII of 1863. Act No II extended to certain parts of the Presidency of Bombay and dealt with holders of lands in those parts who were holding lands wholly or partially exempt from the payment of gov
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.