Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.92 seconds)
Murarilal Patel vs State Of Orissa And Another on 12 April, 2017 cites

Ananda Behera And Another vs The State Of Orissa And Another on 27 October, 1955

"Ananda Behera and another v. State of Orissa and another, AIR 1956 SC 17 is a locus classicus on the 8 subject. The dispute pertained to fishery rights of the plaintiffs over a portion of Chilka lake. The estate was vested in the State of Orissa under the Orissa Estates Abolition Act. Long before vesting of the estate, the petitioners had entered into contracts with the ex proprietor Raja of Parikud and had obtained from the latter, on payment of heavy sums, licences for catching and appropriating all the fish from the fisheries detailed in the schedule of the petition. The State of Orissa refused to recognise the licenses and were about to re- auction the rights. At this juncture, the petitioner had approached the apex Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India on the ground that their fundamental rights enshrined under Articles 19(1)(f) and 31 (I) were infringed. The question arose before the apex Court as to whether the petitioners had acquired any rights or interests in "property" by their several "purchases". The Constitution Bench of the apex Court held that the lake is immoveable property. After promulgation of the Orissa Estate Abolition Act, it vested in the State of Orissa. Right to catch and carry away fish in specific sections of the lake over a specified future period amounts to licence to enter on the land coupled with a grant to catch and carry away the fish, that is to say, it is a 'profit a prendre' which has been regarded as a benefit that arises out of the land and, as such, is immoveable property. If 'profit a prendre' is regarded as tangible immoveable property and the property value is more than Rs.100/- it requires registration under Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 61 - V Bose - Full Document
1   2 Next