<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1958 (11) TMI 26 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168521</link>
    <description>The Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Amendment) Act, 1956 was upheld as a measure of agrarian reform within the State Legislature&#039;s competence under Entry 18 of List II, which is to be construed liberally to include land tenures, landlord-tenant relations, and transfer of agricultural land. The Act was also held protected by Article 31A because the statutory purchase scheme extinguished or modified rights in an estate through transfer of the landlord&#039;s title to the tenant subject to statutory conditions. Section 7 was valid because the Legislature laid down the policy and standards, leaving only limited variation in public interest on prescribed criteria; the constitutional challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2015 11:31:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=378377" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1958 (11) TMI 26 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168521</link>
      <description>The Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Amendment) Act, 1956 was upheld as a measure of agrarian reform within the State Legislature&#039;s competence under Entry 18 of List II, which is to be construed liberally to include land tenures, landlord-tenant relations, and transfer of agricultural land. The Act was also held protected by Article 31A because the statutory purchase scheme extinguished or modified rights in an estate through transfer of the landlord&#039;s title to the tenant subject to statutory conditions. Section 7 was valid because the Legislature laid down the policy and standards, leaving only limited variation in public interest on prescribed criteria; the constitutional challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168521</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>