SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1969 Supreme(SC) 76

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M. HIDAYATULLAH, C.J.I. AND G.K. MITTER, J.
Patel Bhuder Mavji etc., Appellants
Versus
Jat Mamdaji Kalaji (Dead) by his legal Representatives etc., Respondents.
Civil Appeals Nos. 123 and 124 of 1966,
D/- 13-2-1969. 1197
Advocates Appeared
Mr. P. B. Patwari, Senior Advocate (Mr. K. L. Hathi, Advocate of M/s. Hathi and Co., and M/s. S. K. Begga and Mrs. Shureshta Begga, Advocates with him), for Appellants; Mr. P. M. Rawal Advocate and Mr. P. C. Bhartari Advocate for M/s. J. B. Dadachanji and Co., for Respondents.

Advocates:
K.L.Hathi, P.B.PATVARI, P.C.BHARTARI, P.M.RAVAL, S.K.Bagga, Sureshta Bagga

Headnote:

Land Reforms Act - Section 6 - Transfer of Property Act - Section 76 (c) - Saurashtra Agricultur Debtors Relief Act, 1954 - Saurashtra Land Reforms Act, XXV of 1951 - Mortgage to pay revenue - Rights of debtors - High Court delivered main judgment in Civil Revision Application and referred to same in its judgment in Civil Revision Application - Whether they were under a liability under documents of mortgage to pay revenue and other dues to State but there is no dispute that they have been doing so for many years past - Held, Court not know whether there was a contract in contrary and whether mortgagors had covenanted to pay rent and revenue - But even if they could not meet revenue and other State dues out of income and paid same out of their own pockets in order to save security, mortgages were only entitled under Section 72 (b) of Transfer of Property Act to add amount to mortgage money - It is not necessary to consider point canvassed at length before High Court and dealt with in judgment of said Court as to whether provisions of Debtors Relief Act override those in the Land Reforms Act - Objects of two Acts are different - In our view, rights of debtors in this case were not extinguished under Land Reforms Act and it was open to Court exercising jurisdiction under Debtors Relief Act to scale down debt and provide for restoration of land possession of mortgagees to mortgagors on taking fresh accounts parties and directing payments by party to other as as been done this case - Appeals dismissed.

Judgement

MITTER, J. : These are two appeals by special leave from judgments of the Gujarat High Court dated April 28, 1965 in Civil Revision Applications Nos. 88 and 93 of 1961. As the questions involved in both the applications were the same, the High Court delivered the main judgment in Civil Revision Application No. 88/1961 and referred to the same in its judgment in Civil Revision Application No. 93 of 1961. The two applications in the High Court arose out of certain proceedings under the Saurashtra Agricultural Debtors Relief Act. The applicants before the High Court and the appellants before this Court were mortgagees in possession of certain lands belonging to the debtors who are now represented by the respondents. The main question before the High Court was and before us is, whether the debtors had lost all their interest in the lands mortgaged by reason of the operation of the Saurashtra Land Reforms Act, XXV of 1951 and as such were not competent to make an application under the Saurashtra Agricultur Debtors Relief Act, 1954. Hereinafter the two Acts will be referred to as the Land Reforms Act and the Debtors Relief Act.

2. It is not necessary to deal separately with the facts in the two appeals as the course of proceedings in both cases were similar giving rise to common questions of law. We therefore propose to take note of the facts in Civil Revision Application No. 88 of 1961. The creditors, appellants before us, were in possession of the properties - the subject matter of litigation, under two mortgage deeds of Samvat years 1997 and 1999. The first mortgage was for Rs. 991 and the second for Rs. 1,011. The mortgages were with possession and the mortgagees have been appropriating the income of the usufruct thereof for the last 50 years. There is nothing to show whether they were under a liability under the documents of mortgage to pay the revenue and other dues to the State but there is no dispute that they have been doing so for many years past. The lands were situate in Bajana State with its own peculiar land tenure system known as the Girasdari system.

3. The Land Reforms Act which came into force on July 23, 1951 purported to effect important and far-reaching changes in the said system. The preamble to the Act shows that its object was "the improvement of land revenue administration and for ultimately putting an end to the Girasdari system" and the regulation of the relationship between the Girasdari and their tenants, to enable the latter to become occupants of the land held by them and to provide for the payment of compensation to the Girasdars for the extinguishment of their rights. It will be noted at once that the Act aimed at regulating the relationship of persons in the position of landholders an their tenants and to enable the tenants to become the real owners of the soil under direct tenancy from the State. It was not meant to extinguish or affect the rights of the landholders as mortgagors unless the persons in occupation had become tenants either by contract or by operation of law.

4. The Act came into force in the whole of Saurashtra area of the State of Gujarat. Under Section 2 (15) Girasdar meant any talukdar, bhagdar, bhavat, cadet or mal-girasia etc. Under S. 2 (13) estate meant all land of whatever description held by a Girasdar including uncultivable waste whether used for the purpose of agriculture or not and Ghared meant any land reserved by or allotted to a Girasdar before the 20th May, 1950 or for being cultivated personally and in his personal cultivation. A tenant under Section 2 (30) meant an agriculturist who held land on lease from a Girasdar or a person claiming through him and included a person who was deemed to be a tenant under the provisions of the Act. Under Section 3 the provisions of the Act were to have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force. Section 4 provided that all land of whatever description h














Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top