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

1961 Supreme(Guj) 43

J.M.SHELAT
RINARBAI RAMBHAI – Appellant
Versus
STATE of Bombay – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: B.R.SOMPURA, J.R.NANAVATI

J. M. SHELAT, J.

( 1 ) MR. Nanavati however pointed out that the State Legislature has also enacted the Bombay Land Tenures Abolition (Recovery of Records Act 1953 being Act of 1953 under which a notice has been issued to the appellants to deliver up to the Collector or to an officer appointed by the State Government in that behalf all the land records relating to these villages and lands maintained by them so far Mr. Nanavati argued that the State was not entitled to call upon the appellants to deliver up these records as Act L of 1953 was not within the legislative competence of the State Legislature and that even if it were to be so calling upon the appellants to deliver up the records would amount to acquisition or deprivation within the meaning of Article 31 of the Constitution and would be contrary to the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (g ). Such deprivation would be bad in law as it is sought to be made without any compensation payable to the appellants under the Act or otherwise.

( 2 ) SEC. 2 of the Bombay Act L of 1953 defines holder as including a Mulgirasia as defined or referred to in the Bombay Merged Territories (Baroda Mulgiras Tenure Abolition) Act











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