1. Dispute over non-agricultural assessment of personal inam land following the abolition of personal inams under the Bombay Personal Inam Abolition Act and Bombay Land Revenue Code. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
1960 Supreme(SC) 237
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
3rd October 1960.
B.P. SINHA, C.J.I., J.L. KAPUR, P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, K. SUBBA RAO AND K.N. WANCHOO, JJ.
Rangildas Varajdas Khandwala, Appellant
Versus
Collector of Surat and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 6 of 1959.
Advocates Appeared
M/s. Dhan Prasad Balkrishna Padhye and P. K. Chaterjee, Advocates, for Appellant; Mr. H. N. Sanyal, Addl. Solicitor-General of India, (M/s. N. P. Nathwani, K. L. Hathi and R. H. Dhebar, Advocates, with him), for Respondents.
Advocates:
DHAN PRASAD BALKRISHNA PADHYE, H.N.SANYAL, K.L.Hathi, N.P.NATHVANI, P.K.CHATTERJI, R.H.Dhebar
DHAN PRASAD BALKRISHNA PADHYE, H.N.SANYAL, K.L.Hathi, N.P.NATHVANI, P.K.CHATTERJI, R.H.Dhebar
The court ruled that exceptions preventing land from vesting in the State do not exempt such land from inam abolition or full revenue assessment. Land revenue is based on current use, and deeming provisions do not constitute actual assessments for limiting assessment powers.
Headnote:(A) Personal Inam Abolition Act - Sections 4, 5, 7; Land Revenue Code - Sections 45, 48, 52, 117-R; Constitution of India - Article 294(b) - Abolition of personal inams - Liability for land revenue - Non-agricultural assessment - The exception in Section 7 of the Act regarding lands used for building or non-agricultural purposes only prevents such lands from vesting in the State and does not exempt them from the abolition of inam rights or the liability to pay full land revenue under the Code - Assessment of land revenue is based on the actual use of the land at the time of assessment - If land is used for non-agricultural purposes, it must be assessed as such regardless of when such use began. (Paras 3, 4)
(B) Constitutionality of legislation - Immutability of Sanad - State is not precluded from enacting laws that vary the terms of a Sanad issued for recognition of inams. (Para 2)
(C) Land Revenue - Application of Section 52 of the Code - Section 52 applies where no actual assessment has been fixed under Chapter VIII-A; a deeming provision under Section 117-R does not constitute an actual assessment for the purpose of excluding the application of Section 52. (Para 5)
Facts of the case:
The holder of a personal inam land, which was being used for non-agricultural purposes, challenged the order of the revenue authorities to levy non-agricultural assessment. The challenge was based on the constitutionality of the Act abolishing personal inams and the interpretation of sections relating to the vesting of land and the power of the revenue officer to assess land revenue.
Findings of Court:
The Act is constitutional. The exception in Section 7 of the Act only saves certain lands from vesting in the Government but does not exempt them from the general abolition of inam rights or the requirement to pay full land revenue. Since the land was used for non-agricultural purposes, it was correctly assessed as such. Section 52 of the Code is applicable as no actual assessment had been fixed under Chapter VIII-A.
Issues: Whether the Act is constitutional; whether lands used for non-agricultural purposes are exempt from full assessment under the Act; whether the revenue officer has the power to levy non-agricultural assessment under the Code; and whether a deeming provision regarding assessment precludes the application of Section 52 of the Code.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the exception in Section 7 of the Abolition Act only prevents the vesting of land in the State and does not override the abolition of inam rights or the liability for full assessment. Land revenue assessment is determined by the actual use of the land at the time of assessment. Furthermore, a deeming provision under the Code does not equate to an actual assessment for the purpose of limiting the revenue officer's power under Section 52.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Challenge to the Act's constitutionality based on Sanad immutability; contention that non-agricultural use exempts land from assessment and that deemed assessment precludes Section 52 application. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 )
3. The Act's constitutionality is upheld; Section 7 prevents vesting but not assessment; assessment is based on current land use; deemed assessments do not preclude Section 52. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 )
4. Abolition of personal inams subjects land to full assessment based on current use; deemed assessments under Section 117-R do not constitute actual assessments under Chapter VIII-A. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 )
5. Appeal dismissed with costs. (Para 6 )
6. Does the issuance of a Sanad make the terms of a personal inam immutable against subsequent legislation?
No. The court rejected the argument that a Sanad is immutable, holding that the State can enact laws to vary its terms, consistent with previous judicial precedents. (Para 2 )
7. Does the exception in Section 7 of the Bombay Personal Inam Abolition Act, which prevents lands used for buildings from vesting in the State, also exempt them from assessment?
No. The exception in Section 7 only saves such lands from vesting in the Government; it does not exempt them from the payment of land revenue or full assessment under Sections 4 and 5. (Para 3 )
8. How is land revenue assessed when personal inams are abolished and the land is used for non-agricultural purposes?
Assessment is based on the actual use of the land at the time of assessment. If the land is used for non-agricultural purposes, it must be assessed as non-agricultural land. (Para 4 )
9. Does a deemed assessment under Section 117-R of the Bombay Land Revenue Code preclude the Collector from making an assessment under Section 52?
No. While Section 52 does not apply if an assessment is fixed under Chapter VIII-A, the court held that this refers to actual assessment, not a deemed assessment created by Section 117-R. (Para 5 )
Judgment
WANCHOO, J. : This appeal by special leave raises questions relating to the constitutionality and interpretation of certain provisions of the Bombay Personal Inam Abolition Act. No. XLII of 1953; (hereinafter called the Act). The brief facts necessary for present purposes are these. The appellant was the holder of a personal inam which he had purchased from the original inamdar to whom a Sanad had been issued under Bombay Act No. VII of 1863. The land which forms part of the inam was originally in village Athwa but is now in the suburbs of the city of Surat. The appellant was paying Rs. 7/- as Salami and Rs. 6-3-0 as quit-rent the full assessment of the land being Rs. 56-8-0. In November 1952 the City Survey Officer of Surat wanted to levy non-agricultural assessment on this land under S. 134 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879, (hereinafter called the Code) as the land was being used for non-agricultural purpose and a large bungalow had been erected on it. The appellant objected to this and eventually in September 1954 he was informed by the Collector that he would not be assessed under S. 134 of the Code but was liable to non-agricultural assessment with effect from August 1, 1955, in view of proviso (b) to S. 4 of the Act. The appellant objected to this also. The Collector decided on July 28, 1955, that the land was liable to full assessment from August 1, 1955, as non-agricultural under S. 52 of the Code. The appellant then went up in appeal to the Bombay Revenue Tribunal which was dismissed. He filed a writ petition in the High Court challenging the order of the Revenue Tribunal and also challenging the constitutionality of the Act. The High Court rejected the application. It relied on an earlier decision of that Court so far as the challenge to the constitutionality of the Act was concerned. It also held that the order of the Collector by which non-agricultural assessment was to be levied on the applicant from August 1, 1955, was correct. The appellant then applied for a certificate to appeal to this Court which was rejected. He then filed a special leave petition in this Court and was granted special leave; and that is how the matter has come up before us.
2. So far as the constitutionality of the Act is concerned we have considered it in Gangadharrao Narayanrao v. State of Bombay, C. A. S. Nos. 155 to 160 of 1956 : (AIR 1961 SC 288) in which judgment is being delivered to-day, and have upheld the Act. The only fresh point that has been urged in this connection is that in view of Art. 294(b) of the Constitution and in view of the fact that the holder was given a Sanad when his inam was recognized, it was not open to the State of Bombay to enact a law which would in any way vary the terms of the Sanad. This argument based on the immutability of Sanad was rejected by the Federal Court* in Jagannath Baksh Singh v. United Provinces , 1946 FCR 111 and has also been rejected by this Court in Maharaj Umeg Singh v. State of Bombay , (1955) 2 SCR 164. We also reject it for reasons given in the two cases cited. The challenge therefore to the constitutionality of the Act fails in the present appeal also.
* See AIR 1943 F. C. 29 affirmed by the Privy Council-Ed,
3. This brings us to the contention of the appellant that in any case the Collector s order to the effect that the land should be assessed under S. 52 of the Code as non-agricultural is not correct. We are of opinion that there is no force in this contention either. Under S. 4 of the Act, all personal inams have been extinguished and save as expressly provided by or under the Act, all rights legally subsisting on the said date in respect of such personal inams are also extinguished. Therefore the appellant cannot claim protection from being assessed fully after the Act came into force. Section 5 makes it clear that all inam lands shall be liable to the payment of land-revenue in accordance with the provisions of the Code and would thus be liable to full assessment
