https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192149 Section 22(1) of the Vindhya Pradesh Abolition of Jagirs and Land Reforms Act, 1952 was treated as a valid agrarian reform measure: the three-year personal cultivation requirement was regarded as a regulatory condition within the statutory scheme, and Article 31-A protected it from challenge as discriminatory or colourable legislation. Section 37 was also upheld because the legislature could validly exclude civil court jurisdiction over matters assigned to revenue authorities, consistent with section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Clause (4)(e) of the Schedule on compensation was sustained as part of the compensatory scheme, since the jagirdar retained the land and corresponding revenue burden was adjusted. en-us Wed, 24 Feb 1960 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 May 2017 11:48:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192149 Section 22(1) of the Vindhya Pradesh Abolition of Jagirs and Land Reforms Act, 1952 was treated as a valid agrarian reform measure: the three-year personal cultivation requirement was regarded as a regulatory condition within the statutory scheme, and Article 31-A protected it from challenge as discriminatory or colourable legislation. Section 37 was also upheld because the legislature could validly exclude civil court jurisdiction over matters assigned to revenue authorities, consistent with section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Clause (4)(e) of the Schedule on compensation was sustained as part of the compensatory scheme, since the jagirdar retained the land and corresponding revenue burden was adjusted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 24 Feb 1960 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192149