In which of the following cases was it held that “the rights conferred under section 25 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 supersedes any contract to the contrary. The fact that the date of decree makes no difference”?
Explanation & Strategy
Click any section to expand · only one open at a time
This tests recall of the specific case where the SC held that constitutional rights conferred on citizens cannot be taken away. Key cases: Golak Nath (FRs can't be amended), Kesavananda (basic structure can't be altered), Minerva Mills (judicial review is basic structure).
Mobile browsers only show page 1 of a PDF in-panel.
Open in a new tab to read all pages.