State Of Gujarat vs Jetawat Lalsingh Amarsingh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1968 Supreme(SC) 196

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.M. SIKRI, R.S. BACHAWAT AND K.S. HEGDE, JJ.
State of Gujarat, Appellant
Versus
Jetawat Lalsingh Amarsingh and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 1057 of 1965,
D/-7-8-1968.
Advocates appeared
Mr. N. S. Bindra, Senior Advocate, (M/s. S. K. Dholakia and S. P. Nayar, Advocates, with him), for Appellant; Mr.Somnath R. Upadyya and Miss Bhuvanesh Kumari, Advocates and M/s. J. B. Dadachanji and Co., Advocates, for Respondent No, 1.

Advocates:
Bhuvnesh Kumari, J.B.DADACHAN, N.S.BINDRA, S.K.DHOLAKIA, S.P.NAIR, SOMNATH R.UPADHYAY

Headnote:
Bombay Merged Territories and Areas Act, 1954 - Section 14 (1), 2 and 4 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 227 - Bombay Taluqdari Abolition Act, 1949 – Section 14 (1) - Jagirs - Claiming Jiwarak - Fixing Compensation - Whether right to own and possess Gharkhed land and right to receive cash allowance annually from Jagir are rights to property or at any rate interest in property - Whether claim put forward by him can be considered as right to, or interest in property - Whether by abolishing Jagir and by levying assessment on Gharkhed lands any of respondents rights to or interest in property were abolished - Whether that interest can be considered as a right in property – Held, First respondent was enjoying those lands without any liability to pay assessment - That was a right conferred on him under compromise decree - No material was placed before Court to show that Jagirdar was competent in spite of compromise decree to collect assessment from him in respect of those lands - This was not a case of suspension of land revenue - First respondent s right was to enjoy land free of liability to pay land revenue - That was position on date Act came into force - So far as Thakore was concerned right to collect assessment of those lands had been given as Jagir to Jagirdar - Court is considering plaintiff-respondents right to or interest in property as it stood before Act and not after S. 5 of Act came into force - There is no denying fact that right to enjoy a property without liability to pay assessment is a more valuable right than right to enjoy same property with liability to pay assessment - Before Act, first respondent was enjoying Gharkhed lands without liability to pay assessment but after Act came into force he is enjoying those very lands with liability to pay assessment - Therefore there is hardly any doubt that his interest in that property stands modified - In this case it is not necessary to consider whether that interest can be considered as a right in property – Court is also in agreement with High Court that right to receive cash allowance of Rs. 234/12/- annually from Jagir is one of those rights that have got to be compensated under S. 14 (1) - That liability was not personal liability of Jagirdar - First respondent was entitled to get that amount from the Jagir. In other words it was a charge on the Jagir. Therefore it is an interest in property - Appeal dismissed.

Judgement

HEGDE, J. : This is an appeal by special leave. Herein we have to determine the true scope of section 14 (1) of the Bombay Merged Territories and Areas (Jagir Abolition) (Bombay Act No. 39 of 1954). That question arises thus:

2. Respondent No. 1 was the Bhayyat of the Jagir of Ghantoil. That Jagir was situated in the Idar State, a former Indian State. The area comprised in that State is a part of the State of Gujarat at present. The said Jagir was a proprietary Jagir and for the purpose of succession and inheritance, it was governed by the rule of primogenitor. The eldest son succeeded to the Gaddi; the other junior members of the family were granted maintenance known as Jiwarak out of the Jagir estate. The former Thakore of Ghantoil, Shri Dalpatainhji Kumansingh granted as Jitwarak to the father of the present respondent, a half share in a village by means of a deed dated February 18, 1916. In 1928 dispute arose between the Thakore and the Bhayyats in the matter of aforesaid Jiwarak. Hence the first respondent and his brother filed a suit in the Sadar Court of the then ldar State claiming Jiwarak. The Court of first instance decreed the suit in favour of the first respondent and his brothers. The Thakore went in appeal against the said judgment. When the appeal was pending, the dispute was compromised and a consent decree was passed on September 23, 1940. Under the consent decree the following rights were given to the first respondent and his brothers as Jiwarak.

(1) Rights to recover assessment (Vighoti) of Survey Nos. 382-387, 396, 398, 399, 542, 543, 544, 545 and 546 assessed at Rs.175/-.

(2) Right to own and possess Gharkhed Lands consisting of Survey Nos. 219, 220, 225, 227, 228 and 229 assessed at Rupees 74/8/- free from payment of assessment and

(3) Right to receive a cash allowance of Rs. 234/12/- annually from the Jagir.

3. The Act came into force on August 1, 1954 as a result of which all Jagirs in the merged territories of Bombay including the Jagir of Ghantoil were abolished. Thereafter respondent No. 1 claimed compensation under S. 14 (1) of the Act. He applied to the Jagir Abolition Officer for fixing the compensation due to him in respect of his aforementioned rights. That officer rejected his claim but when the matter was taken up in appeal to the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal, the Tribunal granted him compensation in respect of his rights to recover assessment of Rs. 175/- annually, but it rejected his claim for compensation under the remaining two heads. The first respondent then took up the matter to the Gujarat High Court under Art. 227 of the Constitution in Special Civil Application No. 560 of 1961. The High Court allowed that application. It held that the first respondent is entitled to compensation in accordance with the provisions of the Act both in respect of Gharkhed lands as well as in respect of his right to receive cash allowance of Rs. 234/12/- annually. The Jagir Abolition Officer was directed to hold further enquiry for determining a compensation payable to the first respondent in respect of those rights. This appeal is directed against the said order of the High Court.

4. The long title of the Act shows that it is an Act to abolish Jagirs in the merged territories and merged areas in the State of Bombay. Its preamble reads:

"Whereas it is expedient in the public interest to abolish Jagirs of various kinds in the merged territories and merged areas in the State of Bombay and to provide for matters consequential and incidental thereto: it is hereby enacted as follows........ .."

Section 2 defines the various expressions including Gharkhed land, Jagir, Jiwai Jagir, used in the Act. Jagirs are abolished under S. 3. That Section reads:

"Notwithstanding anything contained in any usage, grant, sanad, order, agreement or any law for the time being in force, on and from the appointed date,. ...

(i) all jagirs shall be deemed to have been abolished;

(ii) save as expressly provided by or under the provisions

Click Here to Read the rest of this document