2000 Supreme(SC) 971
2000(3) Supreme 689
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Karnataka High Court)
S. Saghir Ahmad & R.P. Sethi, JJ.
Sri Siddappa (dead) by LRs. & Ors. -Appellants
versus
The State of Karnataka & Ors. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 771 of 1997
Decided on 4-5-2000
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : P. Mahale, (Rajesh Mahale) Advocate for R.C. Kohli, Advocates.
For the Respondents : K.H. Nobinsingh and M. Veerappa, Advocates.
Headnote:Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961-Section 44 read with Section 14-Claim of occupancy right over entire land in possession of tenant-Denial on ground in proceedings under Section 14 for resumption of land tenant agreed to forgo 50% of land in occupation-Held, after insertion of Section 44 and omission of Section 14 by Amendment Act w.e.f. 1.3.1974 tenant s right protected-In earlier proceedings under Section 14 landlord did not take possession of land in execution of order of resumption but filed appeal during pendency of which Section 44 came to effect-Tenants entitled to conferment of rights on whole land in their occupation under Section 44 read with Section 45. (Paras 2 to 6)
JUDGMENT
Sethi, J.-Invoking the provisions of Section 44 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as "the Act"), the original appellant-tenant approached the authorities under the Act for conferment of occupancy rights on the ground of being in possession on the relevant date. His claim was negatived both by the authorities under the Act and the High Court allegedly on the ground that he had made a concession in proceedings initiated under Section 14 of the Act for resumption of land by the landlord. It was found that as the appellant himself had agreed to forego his claim to the extent to 50% of the land in his occupation, he could not invoke the subsequent amendment made in the Act vide Section 44.
2. It is not in dispute that the appellants father Shri Sadappa was a tenant of the land bearing Survey No. 14 measuring 5 acres 6 guntas situated at Hulaganakatti Village, Kalaghatgi Taluk since about 50 years. The respondents are alleged to have initiated proceedings under Section 14 of the Act for resumption of half of the land for their personal cultivation in the year 1967. The application filed by the landlords was partly allowed on 15.10.1968 in RLC No.348 of 1967 permitting them to resume 2 acres 23 guntas of the land. It is also not disputed that despite orders in their favour, the respondents-landlords did not take the possession in execution of the orders of resumption passed. Instead they preferred an appeal before the Tribunal with a prayer for resumption of the entire extent of land. During the pendency of the appeal, the Act was amended on 1.3.1974 (by Act No. 1 of 1974) by which Section 14 was omitted and Section 44 providing vesting of land in Government was inserted. For rejecting the claim of the appellant, the Tribunal and the High Court relied upon the orders passed in favour of the landlords under Section 14 of the Act and did not consider the effect of Section 44 of the Act, which so far as relevant for our purposes, reads :
"44. Vesting of land in the State Government.-(1) All lands held by or in the possession of tenants (including tenants against whom a decree or order for eviction or a certificate for resumption is made or issued) immediately prior to the date of commencement of the Amendment Act, other than lands held by them under leases permitted under Section 5 shall, with effect on and from the said date, stand transferred to and vest in the State Government.
(2) Notwithstanding anything in any decree or order of or certificate issued by any Court or authority directing or specifying the lands which may be resumed or in any contract, grant or other instrument or in any law for the time being in force, with affect on and from the date of vesting and save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, the following consequences shall ensue, namely:-
(a) all rights, title and interest vesting in the owners of such lands and other persons interested in such lands shall cease and be vested absolutely in the State Government free from all encumbrances;
(b) xx xx xx xx
(c) xx xx xx xx
(d) xx xx xx xx
(e) xx xx xx xx
(f) the land-owner, landlord and every person interested in the land whose rights have vested in the State Government under clause (a), shall be entitled only to receive the amount from the State Government as provided in this Chapter;
(g) permanent tenants, protected tenants and other tenants holding such lands shall, as against the State Government, be entitled only to such rights or privileges and shall be subject to such conditions as are provided by or under this Act; and any other rights and privileges which may have occurred to them in such lands before the date of vesting against the landlord or other person shall cease and determine and shall not be enforceable against the State Government.
3. A perusal