Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 29 (0.68 seconds)
Documents citing Sasanka Sekhar Maity & Ors. Etc vs Union Of India & Ors on 9 May, 1980

Smt. Krishna Kamalini Debeya vs Junior Land Reforms Officer, ... on 30 March, 1981

The dependants have also been defined in Section 21 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. While on this question, the provisions of Section 14J of the said Act, which lays down that provisions of Chap. IIB shall have effect notwithstanding (anything) to the contrary contained elsewhere in 'the said Act or in any other law for the time being in force, will have to be considered. Before that, it must also be remembered that those provisions in Chapter IIB have been found to be intra vires by the Supreme Court in the case of Sasanka Sekhar Maity v. Union of India .
Calcutta High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Krishnakumar Agrawal And Ors. vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Ors. on 11 February, 1981

See Authorised Officer, Thanjavur v. Naganatha Ayyar AIR 1979 SC 1487 and Sasanka Sekhar Maity v. Union of India (AIR 1981 SC 522) (supra). In this connection it was also argued that as Section 4 even invalidates a transfer made to a person having land below the ceiling limit or even to landless or marginal farmers, it cannot be held to be protected by Article 31A. The argument has no merit. The agrarian policy contemplated is acquisition of surplus land and distribution of the same by the State to the needy in the order of priority mentioned in Section 35. The object behind Section 4 is to prevent the defeating of the scheme envisaged by the Act of distribution of surplus land. If land-holders are free to transfer land to persons having no land or having land less than the ceiling limit, it will give rise to all sorts of mal-practices and fraudulent devices to escape the ceiling limit. It cannot, therefore, be said that the provisions made in Section 4 are not conducive to agrarian reform and are not protected by Article 31A.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 5 - Full Document

Chandra Sekhar Maity vs The Union Of India & Ors on 3 April, 2013

It has been brought to the Court's notice that in the order dated 26th February, 2013, the cause title has been inadvertently typed as 'Chandra Sekhar Maity Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.' which should read as 'Chandra Sekhar Maity Vs. The Union of India & Ors.' This correction may be suitably incorporated in the order dated 26th February, 2013.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - B Somadder - Full Document
1   2 3 Next