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

1972 Supreme(Pat) 147

SHAMBHU PRASAD SINGH, SHIVESHWAR PRASAD SINHA
Ram Narain Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgment

1. These seven applications by the landlords under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India raise a common question as to vires of Sec. 48-E of the Bihar Tenancy Act (Act No. VIII of 1885) as amended by the Bihar Tenancy (Amendment) Act, 1970 (Act No. VIII of 1970). Therefore, they have all been heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment.

2. Decision of the question whether Sec. 48-E of the Bihar Tenancy Act, as it now stands, is ultra vires or not does not depend on the facts stated in the petitions. Therefore, I do not propose to state the facts alleged by the petitioners in different writ applications at this stage. I would first deal with various contentions of learned counsel for the parties against and for the vires of the said section and thereafter briefly state facts of each case and also deal with any additional point arising for decision in them.

3. Sec. 48-A, as inserted by Sec. 4 of the Bihar Tenancy (Second Amendment) Act, 1955 (Bihar Act 24 of 1955), read as follows:-

-

"48-E. Power to restore to possession under-raiyat unlawfully ejected -- (i) If an under-raiyat is or has been ejected by his landlord from his tenancy or any porti










































































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