REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Babulal and others Appellant

V/S

Gowardhandas And Others Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

ABBOTT V. THE MINISTER OF LAND' [REFERRED TO]
'MOTIBAI V. KAND KARI CHANPAYA' [REFERRED TO]
RAMCHANDRA V. JANARDAN' [REFERRED TO]
'SHANKERLAL V. POONAMCHAND' [REFERRED TO]
N B KHARE VS. STATE OF DELHI [REFERRED TO]
RAMJILAL VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER MOHINDAR GARH [REFERRED TO]
KESHAVAN MADHAVA MENON VS. STATE OF BOMBAY [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF WEST BENGAL HABIB MOHAMMAD STATE OF HYDERABAD STATE OF MYSORE VS. ANWAR ALI SARKAR:ANWAR ALI SARKAR [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADRAS VS. V G ROW:THE UNION OF INDIA AND THE STATE OF TRAVANCORE COCHIN [REFERRED TO]
D K NABHIRAJIAH VS. STATE OF MYSORE [REFERRED TO]
SYED QASIM RAZVI VS. STATE OF HYDERABAD [REFERRED TO]
HABEEB MOHAMED PATITIONER VS. STATE OF HYDERABAD [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF WEST BENGAL VS. SUBODH GOPAL BOSE [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. RAO MANOHAR SINGHJI [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS ENDOW MENTS MADRAS VS. LAKSHMINDRA THIRTHA SWAMIAR OF SHIRUR MUTT [REFERRED TO]
AUDH BEHARI SINGH VS. GAJADHAR JAIPURIA [REFERRED TO]
BEHRAM KHURSHID PESIKAKA VS. STATE OF BOMBAY [REFERRED TO]
ABDUL HAKIM VS. JAN MOHAMMAD [REFERRED TO]
PUNJAB STATE VS. INDER SINGH [REFERRED TO]
UTTAM SINGH VS. KARTAR SINGH [REFERRED TO]
PANCH GUJAR GAUR BRAHMANS VS. AMARSINGH [REFERRED TO]
SIREMAL VS. KANTILAL [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE common question raised in all these seven cases and which has been referred to us for determination is whether sub -ss. (1), (5) and (6) of S. 12. Gwalior Pre -emption Act, Samvat 1992 are repugnant to Arts. 19 (1) (f) and 14 of the Constitution of India and are as such void, and whether for that reason the right of preemption can be enforced in the suits out of which the six appeals and the revision petition arise.

(2.) THE Gwalior Pre -emption Act was enacted in the former Gwalior State in 1936. On the formation of Madhya Bharat the Act was continued in those territories of Madhya Bharat which formerly comprised the Gwalior State, by virtue of the provisions of Madhya Bharat Regulation of Government Act, 1948 (Act I of 1943). Under Art. 372 of the Constitution, the Act is continuing in force in that part of Madhya Bharat which was formerly Gwalior State. The Act deals with the right of pre -emption accruing on sale of immovable property other than agricultural land.

(3.) MR . Chitale, learned Advocate -General who appeared in response to a notice issued by this Court supported the contention of the vendors and the vendees that the right of pre -emption infringed the fundamental right of the vendors and the vendees under Art. 19 (1) (f) and that the restrictions imposed by Cls. (5) and (6) of S. 12 of the Act on the power of disposition or holding could not be regarded as reasonable.

Click here to view full judgment.

BABULAL AND OTHERS Vs. GOWARDHANDAS AND OTHERS

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address