The Right to own Property has been a contentious topic in India ever since the constitution was drafted. Originally protected by Article 31 as a Fundamental Right, it was progressively diluted by a series of changes designed to limit judicial interference and preserve the legislative branch's authority. Property rights were declared mere Constitutional Rights under Article 300A of the Constitution when the 44th amendment removed them from part III of the Constitution. Through land reforms, the founding fathers sought to strike a compromise between upholding pre-existing property rights and establishing an equitable society. Nevertheless, the battle between the courts and the legislature resulted in a number of corrective rulings and constitutional revisions between 1950 and 1980. The paper examines later modifications and significant cases pertaining to property rights, including certain cases and Amendments and further contrasts India's property rights with those of the United Kingdom and the United States, where they are based under Fundamental Law. This paper contends that the 44th Amendment violated the Socialist principles outlined in the preamble, making it in essence unlawful and has tried to showcase through various case laws, the arbitrariness that the government has portrayed while passing such Constitutional Amendments.