State of West Bengal v Subodh Gopal Bose

AIR 1954 Supreme Court 92Supreme Court of India1954Jurisprudence, Constitutional Law I

Rule established

Right to property is a right in rem: available against the whole world; every person has a duty not to interfere with the owner's property

Facts

The State of West Bengal acquired property under the West Bengal Land Development and Planning Act. The property owner challenged the acquisition arguing violation of fundamental right to property (then Art.31). The nature of the right, whether in rem or in personam, was relevant.

Issue

Whether the right to property is a right in rem (against the whole world) or a right in personam (against specific persons).

Held

The Supreme Court held that the right to property is a right IN REM: available against the whole world. Every person (including the State) has a duty not to interfere with the owner's property except as permitted by law. The fundamental right to property (then Art.31) was a constitutional right in rem enforceable against all including government.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the right to property is a right IN REM: available against the whole world. Every person (including the State) has a duty not to interfere with the owner's property except as permitted by law. The fundamental right to property (then Art.31) was a constitutional right in rem enforceable against all including government.

How to use it in an exam

| Subject | How Applied | Chapter |
|---------|------------|---------|
| Jurisprudence | Illustrates right in rem vs right in personam; correlative duty on the world | JUR 3.2 Rights and Duties |

Source

Source: AIR 1954 Supreme Court 92

This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.