Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act, 1908

6 judgments · newest first · showing 1–6

ANOSH EKKAversusSTATE THROUGH CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2026 INSC 357Appeal(s) allowed

The former Jharkhand minister Anosh Ekka was convicted in two separate cases arising from the same set of allegations of acquiring disproportionate assets and misusing his office. The High Court rejected his application for suspension of sentence and bail during the pendency of the appeal, prompting …

KAMLA NETI (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.versusTHE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER & ORS.

2022 INSC 1264Dismissed

The appellant, Kamla Neti, a daughter of a coparcener belonging to a Scheduled Tribe, claimed a one‑fifth share of compensation awarded for land acquired by the State, invoking the survivorship right under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The Reference Court and the Orissa High Court rejected her …

SITU SAHU AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS.

2004 INSC 508Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who had been in possession of land since 1938, challenged a 1978 order under Section 71A of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act that restored possession of the land to a Scheduled‑Tribe claimant alleging fraudulent transfer. The Supreme Court examined whether Section 71A could be applied …

MADHU KISHWAR AND ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

1996 INSC 489Disposed off

The petitioners, tribal women from Bihar, challenged Sections 7, 8 and 76 of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 as discriminatory against women and violative of Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution. The Court examined whether the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and the Indian Succession Act, 1925 …

BHAIYA RAMANUJ PRATAP DEOversusLALU MAHESHANUJ PRATAP DEO & ORS. AND VICE-VERSA

1981 INSC 151Disposed off

Bhaiya Rudra Pratap Deo, holder of the impartible Nagaruntari estate, executed an unregistered maintenance (khorposh) deed in 1952 granting eight villages to his brother’s son, Lalu Maheshanuj. The plaintiff alleged fraud and that the deed was void under Section 12A of the Chota Nagpur Encumbered …

RAMESH BEJOY SHARMA AND ORS.versusPASHUPATI RAI AND ORS.

1979 INSC 121Dismissed

The plaintiff, an intermediary landlord, sued the respondents, tenants‑at‑will, for possession of agricultural land after a notification under Section 3 of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 had vested the plaintiff's estate in the State. The trial court held the plaintiff was in "khas" possession and …