Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
23rd October, 1956
JAGANNADHA DAS, VENKATARAMA AYYAR, SINHA AND S.K. DAS, JJ.
Raja Rajinder Chand, Appellant
Versus
Mst. Sukhi and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeals Nos. 196 to 201 of 1953.
Advocates appeared
Mr. Rang Beharilai, Sr.Advocate (Mr. K. R. Chaudhury, Advocate, with him), for Appellant; Mr. Ganpat Rai, Advocate, for Respondents; Mr. S. M. Sikri, Advocate-General, for Punjab (Mr. Jindra Lal and Mr. R. H. Dhebar, Advocates, with him), for Intervener.
Held: (1) It is not disputed that under S. 31 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, Wajib-ul-arz is a part of the record-of-rights, and entries made therein in accordance with law and the provisions of Chapter IV of the Act and the rules there under, shall be presumed to be true (Vide S. 44). The Wajib-ul-arz or village administration paper is a record of existing customs regarding rights and liabilities in the estate; it is not to be used for the creation of new rights or liabilities,
t2) Taking the most favourable view for the appellant, the entries in the Wajib-ul-arz in these cases can be said to express the views of certain revenue authorities as to the rights of the Raja or the intention of Government, but the views of the revenue authorities as to the effect or construction of a grant or the intention of Government in respect of a grant, do not conclude the matter or bind the Civil Courts.
(3) The Wajib-ul-arz, though it does not create a title, gives rise to a presumption in its support which prevails unless the presumption is properly displaced. It is also that the Wajib-ul-arz being part of a revenue record is of greater authority than a Riwaj-i-am which is of general application and which is not drawn up in respect of individual villages. Whether the statutory presumption attaching to an entry in the Wajib-ul-arz has been properly displaced or not must depend on the facts of each case. - Transfer of Property Act, 1882, Section 8-Grant by sovereign authority-Construction-Crown Grants Act, 1895, Section 3.
In a sanad granted by British Government in favour of one Raja Jodhbir Chand condition No.2 was to the following effect:
"The Raj a Sahib shall not be at liberty to receive on any pretext Mahsul for any commodity from any Mahajan and trader or from the Riaya (subjects) by way of Zakat (octroi), or anything on account of excise and intoxicants. He should receive only revenue from the Raiya living in the villages of his Jagir according to the British Governments rules of practice. In case of contravention of the said rules of practice cash shall be fixed by the Government for the said Raja Sahib or his descendants."
Held: (1) So far as the lands in possession of tenants or subjects were concerned, the Sanad did not grant any right other than the right to receive revenue ; condition No. 2 of the Sanad made it quite clear that the grantee would receive only revenue from the subject living in the villages of his Jagir according to the British Governments rules of practice, and that the grantee was not at liberty to receive on any pretext "Mahsul" for any commodity from any mahajan or trader or any octroi etc. from any of the subjects. If the intention was to grant the right to pine trees standing on the lands of the subjects, one would expect it to be mentioned in condition No.2. The grant was primarily an assignment of land revenue and whatever other rights• might have been included the right to all pine trees on cultivated lands of the subjects was not within the grant. It was impossible to spell out of its terms a grant in favour of Raja Jodhbir Chand of the right to all pine trees on cultivated" and proprietary lands.
(2) The Ordinary rule applicable to grants made by a subject, does not apply to grants made by the sovereign authority and grants made by the Sovereign are to be construed most favourably for the Sovereign. The general rule, however, is capable of important relaxations in favour of the subject. Thus, if the intention is obvious, a fair and liberal interpretation must be given to the grant to enable it to take effect; and the operative part, if plainly expressed, may take effect notwithstanding qualifications in the recitals. In cases where the grant is for valuable consideration, it is construed in favour of the grantee, for the honour of the Sovereign; and where two constructions are possible one valid and the other void, that which is valid ought to be preferred, for the honour of the Sovereign ought to be more regarded than the Sovereigns profit. - Article 133-Finding of fact-Interference-Entries in wajib-ul-arz.
Held: The Supreme Court does not normally go behind a con~ current finding of fact. The question whether from the wajib-ul-arz entries an inference of surrender of relinquishment of a sovereign right by Government can be properly drawn is not a pure question of fact, depending as it does on the true scope and legal effect of those entries. The Supreme Court cannot by resorting to a short cut as it were, relieve itself of the task of examining the wajil-ul-arz entries and considering their true scope and legal effect. - Section 9-Act of State-Annexation ofterritory-Rights of previous Ruler-Grant-Rights of grantee.
The plaintiff, as superior land-lord of Nadaun Jagir in the district of Kangra, Punjab, brought suits for a declaration that he was the owner of all pine trees standing on the lands of the defendants within the said Jagir and for a permanent injunction restraining the latter from interfering with the rights of ownership and extraction of resin from the said trees. He also claimed specified sums as damages for the loss caused to him from the tapping of pine trees by different defendants. The defendants who were the adna maliks (inferior owners) pleaded that they were the owners in possession of the lands on which the trees stood, that the trees were their property, and that the plaintiff had no right to the trees nor had he ever exercised an) right of possession over them.
It transpired that the last independent Ruler of Kangra was Raja Sansar Chand, that Raja Jodhbir Chand was an illegitimate S0n of Raja Sansar Chand, and that after the death of Raja Sansar Chand, Jodhbir Chand was created a Raja, with Nadaun and the surrounding country as his Jagir. The appellant was a direct lineal descendant of Raja Jodhbir Chand, being fourth in the line of descent.
Held: (I) It ma y be accepted that Raja Sansar Chand as a sovereign ruler had a right to all royal trees including pine trees within his territory, but neither Raja J odhbir Chand nor the appellant succeeded to the rights of the independent rulers of Kangra. Raja Jodhbir Chand
1. 1. L. R. 3 Born. 186 (P. C.) relied upon.
was the grantee under a grant first made by Maharaja R,anjit Singh and then by the British Government. Raja Jodhbir Chand was an illegitimate son of Raja Sansar Chand and could not succeed to the rights of the Raja. Also, whatever rights Raja Sansar Chand had as an independent ruler of Kangra came to an end (so far as his descendants were concerned) with the annexation of his territory by the Sikhs, and Raja Jodhbir Chand merely got an assignment of land revenue to the tune of Rs. 30,000 by the grant of Nadaun Jagir by Maharaja Ranjit Singh. The claim of the appellant therefore to the sovereign rights of the independent rulers of Kangra in respect of all royal trees could not be accepted.
It,is one thing to say that the system of land tenure prevailing under the old Katoch rulers continued in spite of the Sikh interregnum, but it is quite a different thing to say that Raja Jodhbir Chand, the grantee of Jagir, succeeded to the rights of the independent Katoch rulers. The rights of the last independent Katoch ruler, under the system of land tenure which prevailed at the time, passed first to the Sikhs who became the rulers of Kangra and then to the British after the Sikh wars. - Sections 35,114,101 to 104-Entries in wajib-ul-arz-Evidential value-Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, Sections 31, 44.
Judgement
S. K. DAS, J.: These are six appeals by the plaintiff Raja Rajinder Chand, the superior landlord (ala-malik) of Nedaun Jagir in the district of Kangra. He brought six suits in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Kangra for a declaration that he was the owner of all pine (chil-pinus Iongifolia) trees standing on the lands of the defendants within the said Jagir and for a permanent injuction restraining the latter from interfering with his rights of ownership and extraction of resin from the said trees. He also claimed specified sums as damages for the loss caused to him from the tapping of pine trees by different defendants from March 24, 1940, up to the date when suits were brought. The defendants, who are the adna maliks (inferior landlords), pleaded that they were the owners in possession of the lands on which trees stood, that the trees were their property, and that the plaintiff had no right to the trees nor had he ever exercised any right of possession over them.
2. Three questions arose for decision on the pleadings of the parties. The first question was - whether all pine trees standing on the land in suit were the property of the plaintiff, i.e., the present appellant. The second question was one of limitation, and the third question related to the quantum of damages claimed by the appellant.
3. The learned Subordinate Judge, who dealt with the suits in the first instance, held that the present appellant had failed to prove his ownership of the trees. He further held that the suits were barred by time. On the question of damages, he hold that if the appellant s claim to ownership of the trees were established, some of the defendants in tour of the suits would be liable for small amounts of damages. In view, however, of his findings on the questions of ownership and limitation, he dismissed the suits. Raja Rajinder Chand then preferred appeals from the judgment and decrees of the learned Subordinate Judge, and the appeals were heard by the learned District Judge of Hoshiarpur. The latter reversed the finding of the learned Subordinate Judge on the question of ownership and held that the present appellant had established his right to the trees in question. He also reversed the finding of the learned Subordinate Judge on the question of limitation, but accepted his finding as to damages. Accordingly, he allowed the appeals, set aside the judgment and decrees of the learned Subordinate Judge, and gave the appellant the declaration and order of injunction he had asked for, as also damages in four of the suits as assessed by the learned Subordinate Judge. The defendants then preferred second appeals to the Punjab High Court. On the main question as to whether the present appellant had been able of establish his right to the trees, the learned Judges of the High Court differed from the learned District Judge and, agreeing with the learned Subordinate Judge, held that the present appellant had not been able to establish his right to the trees. On the question of limitation, however, they agreed with the learned District Judge. In view of their finding that the appellant had failed to establish his right to the trees, the appeals were allowed and the suits brought by the appellant were dismissed. The High Court gave a certificate that the cases fulfilled the requirements of S. 109 (c) and S. 110 of the Code of Civil Procedure. These six appeals have come to this Court on that certificate. We have heard these appeals together, as the questions which arise are the same. The present judgment will govern all the six appeals.
4. The short but important question which arises in these appeals is whether the present appellant has been able to establish his right to all pine (chil) trees standing on the suit lands of the defendants. The question is of some importance, as it affects the rights of ala and adna maliks in Naduan Jagir. The respondents have not contested before us the correctness of the finding of two of the Court
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
