Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: east punjab holdings consolidation and prevention of fragmentation act 1948 Year: 1961 Page 1 of about 4 results (0.068 seconds)

May 04 1961 (SC)

State of Punjab Vs. Suraj Parkash Kapur Etc.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-04-1961

Reported in : AIR1963SC507; [1962]2SCR711

..... point has absolutely no legs to stand upon. the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948, was enacted, in the words of the long title annexed to the act, to provide for compulsory consolidation of agricultural holdings and for the prevention of fragmentation of agricultural holdings in the state of punjab. under s. 15 of the said act, the scheme prepared by the consolidation officer shall provide for the payment of compensation to any ..... thereon. on july 28, 1954, the state government issued a notification under s. 14 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter called the act), declaring its intention to make a scheme for the consolidation of the holdings. on april 30, 1955, a draft scheme was proposed by the consolidation officer and published indicating, inter alia, that the respondents' family would be given 84 standard kanals consisting ..... owner who is allotted a holding of less market value than .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 15 1961 (HC)

Ajit Singh and anr. Vs. Fateh Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-15-1961

Reported in : AIR1962P& H412

..... was mutated in favour of plaintiffs nos. 1 to 5 to the exclusion of bhim singh's sons. in the year 1954-55, proceedings under the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmention) act, 1948, started and in those proceedings bhim singh's sons, i.e., the defendants, were put in possession of half of the estate and the plaintiffs ..... eye of law so far as bhim singh's adoption is concerned and that the defendants are entitled to half the estate as granted to them in consolidation proceedings. the plaintiffs, however, on the other hand rely mainly on the award decree and also raise challenge to the validity of the adoption of ..... share has been proved which may amount to the ouster of the defendants or their father, so as to lead to the conclusion that they were holding the land in excess of their share adversely.(13) for the reasons gives above, i am of the view that his appeal must be allowed. ..... be mandatory and compliance with them regarded as a condition of the validity of the adoption. on the other hand, under the customary law in the punjab, adoption is secular in character, the object being to appoint an heir and the rules relating to ceremonies and to preferences in selection have to be ..... award a rule of the court. therefore, he is bound by his own act and cannot now rise the question that the decree is nullity to the extent that it set aside his adoption. once that decree is held to hold the field the plaintiffs' suit must succeed. he further supports his argument by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 10 1961 (HC)

Jagat Singh Didar Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-10-1961

Reported in : AIR1962P& H221

..... is not open to debate at least by this court. i am in complete agreement with the views which have been expressed by my learned brethren that the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, l of 1948, is a measure designed to promote agrarian reform and its vires in any event cannot be challenged. i would concur that the petition be dismissed without any ..... .tek chand, j.(14) following the rule in kochuni's case, air 1960 sc 1080 and on the ground that the impugned act has an agrarian reform as one of its objects the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act (50 of 1948) is not ultra vires of the constitution, and i would dismiss the petition and would make no order as to costs.dua, ..... orderkhosla, c.j.(1) in this case we are called upon to consider the vires of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act (l of 1948) as amended by punjab act no. xxvii of 1960. the act was considered by a full bench of this court in kishan singh v. state, 1960-62 pun l. r. 840: (air 1961 punj 1)(fb). then the present matter ..... 840: (air 1961 punj 1)(fb) are given in my referring order dated 28th march, 1961 and need not be repeated.(16) i agree that the east punjab (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act (l of (1948), as amended by punjab act, xxvii of 1960, is a valid piece of legislation and cannot be struck down as unconstitutional. i would, however, refrain from expressing any considered opinion .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 28 1961 (HC)

Sant Ram and ors. Vs. Labh Singh and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Aug-28-1961

Reported in : AIR1962All199

..... a stranger should not be allowed to enter into the joint property so far as it is possible. its aim is to prevent the fragmentation of the zamindari property and to help in its consolidation. we are all aware of the disputes which arise when a zamindari property is held by a large number of co- ..... court, in sardha ram v. abdul majid mohd. amir khan, air 1960 punj 196, where all learned judges held unanimously that the provisions of the punjab preemption act 1913 including those granting the right of pre-emption on the ground of vicinage continued to be valid and had not become ultra vires under the constitution. ..... pre-emption under the mohammadan law became void under article 13 of the constitution, as it imposed; an unreasonable restriction on the fundamental right of acquiring and holding property guaranteed under the constitution, and the plaintiff could not, therefore, claim a right of pre-emption on the ground that he was a shafi-e ..... common appendage. the plea of the defendant that she also shared an appendage to the house was rejected on the ground that the house on the east of the house in dispute of which the defendant claimed to be the owner really belonged not to her but to her husband. the gift which the ..... the agra pre-emption act, 1922 is a recognition of the principle that the right of pre-emption is for the benefit of the society and that it is reasonable to give effect to that right. there is nothing inherently wrong in pre-emption.'32. in f. a. no. 12 of 1948, d/- 16-9- .....

Tag this Judgment!

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //