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

1953 Supreme(Bom) 143

M.C.CHAGLA, Y.V.DIXIT
Chimanlal Dipchand – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bombay – Respondent


JUDGMENT - Chagla, C.J.

1. There are two petitions made under Art. 226 of the Constitution challenging Sub-section (2) of Section 6, Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, as being ultra vires of the Legislature and also challenging a notification issued by Government under that Sub-section. There is also a reference made to us by the Civil -Judge, junior Division, Kumta, who had a similar question to consider and who has taken the view that Sub-section (2) of Section 6 is ultra vires and has made a reference under Section 113, Civil P. C. The learned judge has given a very able and carefully considered judgment and his judgment has been of considerable help to us.

2. Section 6, Tenancy Act provides for the fixation of a maximum rent and the maximum rent which a landlord is entitled to recover may be fixed irrespective of any agreement, usage, decree or order of the Court or of any law, and Sub-section. (1) provides that the maximum rent payable by a tenant for the lease of any land shall not, in the case of an irrigated land, exceed one-fourth and in the case of any other land exceed one-third of the crop of such land or its value as determined in the prescribed manner. Th






















































































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