https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193384 The Act in question was challenged on various grounds including lapsing before receiving the President's assent, colorable legislation, discrimination against certain plantations, and violation of Article 14 regarding compensation and ceiling fixation. The court held that the Act did not lapse, was not colorable legislation, discriminated against areca and pepper plantations unjustifiably, and the progressive reduction in compensation was discriminatory. The Act was struck down in its application to ryotwari lands transferred from Madras to Kerala, with costs awarded to the petitioners from the State of Kerala. en-us Tue, 05 Dec 1961 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Jul 2017 17:33:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193384 The Act in question was challenged on various grounds including lapsing before receiving the President's assent, colorable legislation, discrimination against certain plantations, and violation of Article 14 regarding compensation and ceiling fixation. The court held that the Act did not lapse, was not colorable legislation, discriminated against areca and pepper plantations unjustifiably, and the progressive reduction in compensation was discriminatory. The Act was struck down in its application to ryotwari lands transferred from Madras to Kerala, with costs awarded to the petitioners from the State of Kerala. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 05 Dec 1961 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193384