Reviewed case brief
KT Plantation Pvt Ltd v State of Karnataka
(2011) 9 SCC 1
The Supreme Court examined the scope of the right to property under Article 300A after the deletion of Article 19(1)(f) and Article 31 by the 44th Constitutional Amendment. The Court held that Article 300A is not a mere common law right but a constitutional right, and any deprivation must be by auth
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Year
- 2011
- Subjects
- Land Laws
- Reviewed
- 2026-06-18
Rule established
After the 44th Amendment, the right to property is a constitutional right under Article 300A requiring authority of law for deprivation; eminent domain power must satisfy the test of public purpose and fair compensation
Facts
- KT Plantation Pvt Ltd owned coffee estates in Karnataka
Issues
Held
- Article 300A confers a **constitutional right**, not merely a statutory right
Ratio decidendi
After the 44th Amendment, the right to property under Article 300A is a constitutional right requiring the State to demonstrate authority of law for any deprivation. The law must satisfy Article 14, must serve a public purpose, and must provide for compensation that is not illusory. The power of eminent domain is inherent in sovereignty but its exercise is subject to constitutional limitations including the basic structure doctrine.
How to use it in an exam
- Primary authority for the post-44th Amendment status of property rights
Editorial source
(2011) 9 SCC 1; verified via SCC Online
Educational summary only. Read the reported judgment or an authorised law report before relying on the case professionally.