Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.29 seconds)Section 3 in The Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
The Amending Act, 1897
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 5 in The Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
The Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956
Satyanarayan Prasad Sah And Ors. vs State Of Bihar And Anr. on 31 July, 1980
Both the aforementioned decisions were noticed in
Satyanarayan Prasad Sah and others v. State of Bihar and
another. In that case upon the issue of a notification under
s. 3 of the Act at a time when the matter was pending in the
High Court an order was made under s. 4 (c) abating the
proceeding as also the suit from which the proceeding arose.
Writ Petitions were filed in this Court under Article 32 of
the Constitution questioning the constitutional validity of
s. 4 of the Act as being violative of Arts. 14 and 19 of the
Constitution.
Article 32 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
U.P Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953
Ram Adhar Singh vs Ramroop Singh & Ors on 26 October, 1967
After repelling the challenge to the vires of
s. 4 this Court affirming the decisions in Ram Adhar SIngh
and Chattar Singh's case (supra) held that maybe that the
High Court should not have nullified the decree of the trial
court but should have merely declared that the proceeding
stood abated which this Court understood to mean that the
civil proceeding comes to a naught. In other words, the
proceedings from its commencement abate and no decision in
the proceeding at any stage would have any impact on the
adjudication of claims by the parties under the Act.
1