CAM has embarked on an analysis of a series of such landmark decisions in an attempt to present a The case of Kesavananda Bharati v. The critical analysis of Kesavananda Bharati case. Abstract: The more often faceoff between the legislature and the judiciary is one of the. Case Study: Kesavananda Bharati vs State Of Kerala And Anr 24 April, Name of the case – Kesavananda Bharati vs State Of Kerala.

Author: Daisho Shashura
Country: Lebanon
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Video
Published (Last): 4 August 2011
Pages: 329
PDF File Size: 1.4 Mb
ePub File Size: 10.71 Mb
ISBN: 529-4-43064-468-7
Downloads: 51567
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Brazahn

This article kezavananda text from this source, which is in the public domain. The Supreme Court reviewed the decision in Golaknath v. Eminent Jurist, legendary advocate and co-counsel in Kesavananda Bharati Case, Nani Palkhiwala and the seven judges at majority bench were of bharayi opinion that through this judgment they have saved Indian democracy which our respected ancestors fought so hard for.

To nullify the Golaknath verdict, Parliament enacted the 24th Amendment to the Constitution, laying down that its powers to amend the Constitution were unrestricted and unlimited.

However, it was held that the court could intervene if the amount was illusionary or whimsical and no relationship to the market value of the property. It is often said that every major constitutional decision has a political or social backdrop; and so was the verdict of Kesavananda Bharati. Held that the word ‘amendment’ was used in the sense of permitting a change, in contradistinction to destruction, which the repeal or abrogation brings about.


Archived from the original on Ninth Schedule was inserted which protects any legislation inserted within the schedule, from judicial review. The 29 th Amendment passed in the year had the effect of inserting The Kerala Land Reforms Act into IX Schedule which means it is outside the scope of judicial scrutiny.

Supreme Court of India. Kesavananda Bharati actually left an ambigious historical legacy.

The Act was challenged in High Court which held the act to be unconstitutional for being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The doctrine has been tweaked at regular intervals to accommodate judicial ideology and morality. Kesavananda Bharathi is the case which saved Indian democracy; thanks to Shri Kesavananda Bhararieminent jurist Nanabhoy Palkhivala and the seven judges who were in the majority.

The bench in this decision after putting a lot of thought into it had came up with a very unique.

Case Study: Kesavananda Bharati vs State Of Kerala And Anr 24 April, 1973

This site uses cookies. Retrieved from ” https: Maybe it is time for the strong and eloquent judges of the Supreme Court of India to replace this and restore the Constitution to the glory of its origin. Maybe it is time to reargue Kesavananda Bharati. This question has to be considered in each case bharatk the context of a concrete problem.

The critical analysis of Kesavananda Bharati case

Palkhivala and other counsels appeared for the petitioners, argued for 31 days. Your email address will not be published. State of Punjab, and considered the validity of the 24th, 25th, 26th and 29th amendments. Kamal Nath — Kamal Nath Case.

Keshavananda Bharti vs. State of Kerala

Article does not contain a power to amend the constitution but only a procedure. The bill in the present case having been admittedly amended in several particulars during its passage through the House, the Amendment Act cannot be said to have been passed in conformity with the procedure prescribed in Article The Procedure prescribed for the amendment is mandatory.


The fundamental question dealt in Kesavananda Bharati v State of Kerala is whether the power to amend the constitution is an unlimited, or there is identifiable parameters regarding powers to amend the constitution. Although the court upheld the basic structure doctrine by only the narrowest of margins, it has since gained widespread acceptance and legitimacy due to subsequent cases and judgments.

State of Rajasthan [] 1 S. The petitioner then moved an application for urging additional grounds and for amendment of the writ petition in order to challenge the above Constitutional amendments. In a sharply divided verdict, by a margin ofthe court held that while the Parliament has “wide” powers, it did not have the power to destroy or emasculate the basic elements or fundamental features of the constitution.

The best place to begin answering these questions is the Constituent Assembly Debates.

Ironically, this judgment itself is a perfect example of this argument. This argument of state was based on the basic principle of Indian Legal System i.