SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1994 Supreme(SC) 616

B.L.HANSARIA, KULDIP SINGH
Krishna Minor Through His Father And Guardian – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent


Advocates:
L.K.PANDEY, LALITA KAUSHIK, Naresh Kaushik, P.C.Jain, R.K.MAHESHWARI, SHANKAR DIVATE,

Judgment

HANSARIA, J.:- The law of pre-emption is, historically speaking, a product of custom of the Mohamedan world. It came to be enforced here after the advent of Mohamedan Rule. To start with it was accepted as a part of custom and was applied by the courts, particularly in Northern India accordingly. It received statutory recognition in Section 22 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956. But this Court has regarded this right as archaic, feudal and weak in character.

2. In most of our States the law of pre-emption does not exist as at present. Even the Punjab Pre-emption Act of 1913 (as amended in 1960) has ceased to be a law in the State of Punjab. But in the State of Haryana, as well as in a part of walled city of Delhi, it still prevails. In the present batch of writ petitions and appeals whatever is left of this law after the decision by the Constitution Bench in Atam Prakash v. State of Haryana, AIR 1986 SC 859 has been assailed as violative of Article 14 of the Constitution and of Article 19(1)(f) as it was before its omission.

3. As the aforesaid attempt has been made despite the decision in Atam Prakash. it should be known as to what was decided in that case. Reference to that judg












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top