NAEEM BANO ALIAS GAINDO versus MOHAMMAD RAHEES & ANR.

NAEEM BANO ALIAS GAINDO versus MOHAMMAD RAHEES & ANR.

The proviso to Article 254(2) empowers Parliament to amend or repeal a repugnant State law; therefore when Parliament amended Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (effective 31.12.2002) subsequent to the U.P. Legislature's 1954 amendment, the Parliamentary amendment applies and the U.P. amendment is impliedly repealed to the extent of repugnancy; consequently the High Court erred in withholding consideration awaiting a larger Bench and must decide the tenant's revision petition on merits expeditiously.

Parties
Appellant: Naeem Bano Alias Gaindo; Respondent: Mohammad Rahees & Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
22 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Leave Granted; Appeal From High Court Order Dated 18.11.2022 in Article 227 Revision (civil Appeal No. 13050 of 2024)
Outcome
Appeal disposed of
Legal Topics
Article 254, Repugnancy, Concurrent List, Section 106 Transfer of Property Act, 1882, State Amendment Vs Parliamentary Amendment, Notice for Ejectment
Constitutional Law Property Law Legislative Competence Article 254 Repugnancy Concurrent List Section 106 Transfer of Property Act, 1882 State Amendment Vs Parliamentary Amendment +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Naeem Bano Alias Gaindo

Appellant

Mohammad Rahees & Anr.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Leave Granted; Appeal From High Court Order Dated 18.11.2022 in Article 227 Revision (civil Appeal No. 13050 of 2024)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Parliamentary amendment to Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, made w.e.f. 31.12.2002, applies despite an earlier U.P. State amendment of Section 106 dated 30.11.1954
  2. 2 Whether the proviso to Article 254(2) empowers Parliament to amend or repeal a repugnant State law and thereby render the State amendment inoperative

Ratio Decidendi

The proviso to Article 254(2) empowers Parliament to amend or repeal a repugnant State law; therefore when Parliament amended Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (effective 31.12.2002) subsequent to the U.P. Legislature's 1954 amendment, the Parliamentary amendment applies and the U.P. amendment is impliedly repealed to the extent of repugnancy; consequently the High Court erred in withholding consideration awaiting a larger Bench and must decide the tenant's revision petition on merits expeditiously.

Court Disposition

Appeal disposed of

Orders

  • Impugned order dated 18.11.2022 set aside
  • High Court directed to dispose of the respondent-tenants' revision petition on merits and in light of observations made, as expeditiously as possible