Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 27 views

    Right To Property

    Uploaded by

    Ankit Jindal
    The document discusses the right to property in India. It was originally a fundamental right but was later removed. Key points: 1) The right to property was incorporated in the Indian constitution but was a point of contention between the judiciary and legislature over compensation. 2) The judiciary held that "just equivalent" compensation must be provided when property is taken, while the legislature argued it was only required for compulsory acquisition. 3) The question of who determines compensation - the judiciary or legislature - was settled by the 25th amendment in 1971, removing judicial review of compensation amounts.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Right To Property

    Uploaded by

    Ankit Jindal
    27 views14 pages
    The document discusses the right to property in India. It was originally a fundamental right but was later removed. Key points: 1) The right to property was incorporated in the Indian constitution but was a point of contention between the judiciary and legislature over compensation. 2) The judiciary held that "just equivalent" compensation must be provided when property is taken, while the legislature argued it was only required for compulsory acquisition. 3) The question of who determines compensation - the judiciary or legislature - was settled by the 25th amendment in 1971, removing judicial review of compensation amounts.

    Original Title

    right to property

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses the right to property in India. It was originally a fundamental right but was later removed. Key points: 1) The right to property was incorporated in the Indian constitution but was a point of contention between the judiciary and legislature over compensation. 2) The judiciary held that "just equivalent" compensation must be provided when property is taken, while the legislature argued it was only required for compulsory acquisition. 3) The question of who determines compensation - the judiciary or legislature - was settled by the 25th amendment in 1971, removing judicial review of compensation amounts.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    27 views14 pages

    Right To Property

    Uploaded by

    Ankit Jindal
    The document discusses the right to property in India. It was originally a fundamental right but was later removed. Key points: 1) The right to property was incorporated in the Indian constitution but was a point of contention between the judiciary and legislature over compensation. 2) The judiciary held that "just equivalent" compensation must be provided when property is taken, while the legislature argued it was only required for compulsory acquisition. 3) The question of who determines compensation - the judiciary or legislature - was settled by the 25th amendment in 1971, removing judicial review of compensation amounts.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 14

    Right to Property

    Deeksha Sharma
    Assistant professor
    Department of Law
    University of Rajasthan
    Right to property is a Natural Right: John
    Locke
    Also incorporated as Fundamental Right in US Constitution in the same provision as life
    and liberty.
    Indian Constitution also incorporated the Right to property as Fundamental Right. Article
    19(1) (f) and article 31(1)
    19(1) (f): to acquire, hold and dispose of property
    19(5): reasonable restriction: interest of general public and ST
    31: no person shall be deprived of his property save with the authority of law.
    Concept of Eminent Domain

    State is the owner of all property within its territory


    State can acquire any property for public purpose and after giving compensation.
    Concept of Eminent Domain is incorporated in Article 31(2)
    Also was there in Government of India Act 1935
    Article 31(2) Main Elements

    State takes possession of or acquires any property


    For public purpose
    Will be done only under the law
    Law will provide for compensation/ or fixes principles for the determination of
    compensation
    The Question of Compensation: bone of contention
    between Judiciary and legislature

    Question 1: when compensation is to be given

    Question 2: how much compensation is to be given?

    Question 3: who is the final authority regarding the question of compensation: judiciary or the
    legislature?
    The Question of Compensation 1: When
    compensation is to be given

    State of WB v. Subodh Gopal 1954


    Judiciary:
    Give Saghir Ahmad v. State of UP 1954
    compensation
    when a person is
    deprived of his
    right to property
    Legislature:
    Compensation to be given
    only when there is
    compulsory acquisition and Constitution (Fourth
    requisition of property i.e. Amendment), 1955
    transfer of ownership and
    possession in government
    Question of Compensation 2: How much
    compensation is to be given?

    Judiciary: “Just equivalent”


    compensation Legislature: No amendment in the term
    compensation by Fourth Amendment 1955
    State of WB v. Bella Banerji 1954
    The Question of Compensation 3: Who is the final
    authority regarding the question of compensation:
    judiciary or the legislature?

    We can look into the adequacy of 4th Amendment,1955: no Judicial Review of


    compensation. It should be “just adequacy of compensation. It will be decided
    equivalent:” Bella Banerji Case 1954 by the legislature as per law. Legislature is
    final authority on question of compensation
    Position After 1955
    The Question of Compensation 1: When
    compensation is to be given

    Law is settled by the 4th


    amendment. Compensation only
    in case of “compulsory
    acquisition and requisition”
    under the law. Question no more
    controversial
    Question of Compensation 2: How much
    compensation is to be given?
    Since no change in the term
    compensation, interpretation of
    25th Amendment 1971: “compensation” word
    Bella Banerji will continue. “Just
    replace by “amount”. Now “Just equivalent”
    equivalent” compensation:
    does not apply
    Vajravelu v. Special Deputy
    collector, 1965
    The Question of Compensation 3: Who is the final
    authority regarding the question of compensation:
    judiciary or the legislature?
    Adequacy of compensation

    No Judicial Review

    Relevancy of principles for fixing


    compensation
    If compensation is a fraud on
    Constitution
    Judicial review
    Vajravelu v. Special Deputy collector, 1965
    UoI v. Metal Corporation of India 1967
    Bank Nationalisation Case(RC Cooper v UoI 1970)
    The Question of Compensation 3: Who is the final
    authority regarding the question of compensation:
    judiciary or the legislature?

    25th amendment 1971:


    replace “compensation”
    with “amount”

    Effect: all
    interpretations of
    “compensation”
    became ineffective
    Kehsvanand Bharti v. State of Kerala AIR
    1973 SC 1461

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy