Esheria India Case Law
Sign in
India Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

India Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter India case law

Results update automatically as you type.

India decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Agrarian reform

VASANT GANPAT PADAVE (D) BY LRS. & ORS . versus ANANT MAHADEV SAWANT (D) THROUGH LRS. & ORS

Literal interpretation of Section 32-F(1)(a) causes discrimination and absurdity by requiring intimation only for minor landlords. To conform with Article 14 and the object of agrarian reform, the Court eliminates the words 'of the fact that he has attained majority' from Section 32-F(1)(a), holding that intimation of cessation (majority, death, or disability ending) must be given to tenants of all three categories of landlords, enabling the tenant to exercise the right of purchase.

Source excerpt

  • Interpretation of statutes
  • Equality under article 14
  • Tenant's right to purchase land
  • Amendment to maharashtra tenancy and agricultural lands act
Read case analysis
Property law

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. versus GRAM PANCHAYAT AND ORS.

The appellants failed to place any material or documentary evidence showing that the disputed land was vested in them or transferred by sale or otherwise in their favour; the amended provision under Act 8 of 1995 has no application as per findings of the Collector, Commissioner, and High Court. The appeal is dismissed as the Gram Panchayat owns the land, and no right accrues to appellants under the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950.

Source excerpt

  • Punjab village common land (regulation) act, 1961
  • Vesting of land
  • Title dispute
  • Mutation
  • Lease of property
Read case analysis
Constitutional law

PARAMBIKULAM A.P.O. ASSOCIATION versus STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.

The Parambikulam Aliyar Project (Regulation of Water Supply) Act, 1993 was validly enacted for agrarian reform and equitable water distribution. The prior High Court order did not confer a vested right to water supply once in 18 months, and there is no impediment for the legislature to introduce an Act benefiting more people. The Act cannot be regarded as arbitrary or unconstitutional.

Source excerpt

  • Legislative powers
  • Equitable distribution of water
  • Validating statutes
  • Promissory estoppel
  • Rotation-based irrigation
Read case analysis
Constitutional law

SRI BAGAWATI TEA ESTATES LTD. versus GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND ORS.

The failure of the state to implement the assignment of forest lands as contemplated by Section 10 of the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971 does not render the Act void or unconstitutional; the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 does not make implementation impossible. Only actual failure to produce relevant data or particulars can justify review under Section 8-C(3), not a mere change of view on the same material.

Source excerpt

  • Constitutional validity
  • Agrarian reform
  • Vesting of forests
  • Review under kerala private forests act
  • Forest (conservation) act
Read case analysis
Land law

STATE OF KARNATKA versus KRISHNAJI SRINIVAS KULKARNI AND ORS.

Despite expiry of lease, company continued to be in juridical possession under the Act, making it a 'holder' for Section 79-B purposes; its declaration triggered vesting of 600 acres in the State, and quoting a wrong provision did not affect the jurisdiction of the authorities.

Source excerpt

  • Ceiling on land holdings
  • Company holding agricultural land
  • Juridical possession
  • Declaration under land reform statutes
Read case analysis
Constitutional law

UNION TERRITORY OF GOA, DAMAN AND DIU AND ANR. versus LAKSHMIBAI NARAYAN PATIL ETC. ETC.

A statute can qualify as agrarian reform under Article 31A even in the absence of ceiling provisions, provided it seeks to transfer rights in estate to tillers with compensation to landlords. The Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy (5th Amendment) Act, 1976 is such a measure and thus constitutionally protected. The constitutional amendment including the Act in the Ninth Schedule is valid. The appeals are allowed and the writ petition is dismissed.

Source excerpt

  • Validity of agrarian reform legislation
  • Protection under article 31a
  • Land ceiling provisions
  • Judicial review of constitutional amendments
Read case analysis
Constitutional law

STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. versus KAMLABEN JIVABHAI & ORS.

The hereditary right to receive Rs.3,500 per annum in lieu of collecting forest produce constitutes a right in an estate for the purposes of agrarian reform under Article 31A. Its extinguishment by the Gujarat Surviving Alienations Abolition Act, 1963 is constitutionally valid. Respondents are entitled to compensation as provided by the Act, and such compensation is not barred by Articles 14, 19, or 31.

Source excerpt

  • Abolition of alienations
  • Rights in forest land
  • Compensation for extinguished rights
Read case analysis
Constitutional law

S. THENAPPA CHETTIAR ETC. versus STATE OF TAMIL NADU

The challenged amendment (Act 23 of 1969) forms an integral part of Tamil Nadu's agrarian reform; inclusion of the appellants' lands within Schedule IA to Act 26 of 1963 is protected by Article 31A of the Constitution. Even if there is a violation of Article 14, the protection of Article 31A prevails, and the legislation cannot be invalidated on such grounds.

Source excerpt

  • Abolition of inam estates
  • Ryotwari settlement
  • Retrospective legislation
  • Protection under article 31a
  • Challenge under articles 14, 19, 31
Read case analysis
Constitutional law

GRAM PANCHAYAT OF VILLAGE, JAMALPUR versus MALWINDER SINGH & ORS.

There is direct conflict regarding vesting of evacuee property between the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1953 (Section 3) and Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950 (Section 8(2)). The law made by Parliament prevails to the extent of repugnancy unless Presidential assent is obtained for the State law for that specific purpose. The State Act, reserved and assented to for agrarian reform under Articles 31 and 31A, cannot override the Central Act regarding custodian’s rights, except for the purpose for which the assent was granted.

Source excerpt

  • Repugnancy between state and central laws
  • Vesting of evacuee property
  • President's assent to state law
  • Village common lands
  • Administration of evacuee property
Read case analysis
Land law

BEGULLA BAPI RAJU ETC. ETC. versus STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH ETC. ETC.

A separated minor son, even if divided from the family before the Act, remains part of the 'family unit' for the purposes of ceiling calculations, and lands transferred by such sons or by the petitioners prior to the Act are included in the aggregated holding in light of the statutory definitions and explanations. The definition of 'family unit' and the manner of aggregation do not violate Articles 14 or 21 and are protected under Article 31A and 31B. Petitioners cannot raise new factual issues regarding drought-prone area without required notification or necessary foundation before lower cou…

Source excerpt

  • Ceiling on agricultural holdings
  • Definition of family unit
  • Constitutional validity
  • Article 14
  • Article 21
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

India decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.