https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289230 Section 24 of the West Bengal Non-Agricultural Tenancy Act was treated as constitutionally settled by binding Supreme Court precedent, so the Article 19(1)(f) challenge failed. The Court also read Section 4 broadly, holding that the stated purpose could fall within the residuary expression "other purposes," defeating the objection to pre-emption on that ground. A fresh factual objection that bona fide requirement lacked a finding on means was not entertained because it had not been raised below. The limitation plea was rejected under binding precedent, and compensation for improvements was denied because the purchase remained subject to the pre-emptive right and the statute provided no such relief. en-us Fri, 13 Feb 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Jul 2020 19:07:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289230 Section 24 of the West Bengal Non-Agricultural Tenancy Act was treated as constitutionally settled by binding Supreme Court precedent, so the Article 19(1)(f) challenge failed. The Court also read Section 4 broadly, holding that the stated purpose could fall within the residuary expression "other purposes," defeating the objection to pre-emption on that ground. A fresh factual objection that bona fide requirement lacked a finding on means was not entertained because it had not been raised below. The limitation plea was rejected under binding precedent, and compensation for improvements was denied because the purchase remained subject to the pre-emptive right and the statute provided no such relief. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 13 Feb 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289230