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

1991 Supreme(Bom) 646

BOMBAY HIGH COURT
S.P.BHARUCHA, B.N.SRIKRISHNA
Minoo Framroze Balsara – Appellant
Versus
Union of India and others – Respondent


JUDGMENT

BHARUCHA, J.

1. The definition of "public premises" in S. 2(e) of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (hereinafter called "the Eviction Act, 1971") was extended by Act 61 of 1980 (with effect from 22nd December, 1980) to cover "(2) Any premises belonging to, or taken on lease by, or on behalf of, (i) any company as defined in S. 3 of the Companies Act, 1956, in which not less than fifty-one per cent, of the paid up share capital is held by the Central Government or any company which is a subsidiary within the meaning of that Act of the first mentioned company, (ii) any corporation (not being a company as defined in S. 3 of the Companies Act, 1956, or a local authority) established by or under a Central Act and owned or controlled by the Central Government....." These writ petitions and appeal challenge the vires of the Eviction Act, 1971, in so far as it is made applicable to premises belonging to what we shall call "Government companies and corporations". The challenge is based upon Arts. 14 and 19(1)(f) and (g) of the Constitution of India. It is also contended that, having regard to Art. 254(2), the provisions of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and



















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