Judgment

RAMASWAMI, J.:- This appeal is brought by special leave from the judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated February 16, 1965 in Civil Revision No. 373 of 1963 which was filed against the judgment of the Additional Civil Judge, Mirzapur dated December 4, 1962 in Revenue Appeal No. 417 of 1961.

2. The respondent made an application before the Rehabilitation Grants Officer, Mirzapur under Section 79 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 to obtain the determination and payment of rehabilitation grant to him. The case of the respondent was that he was the son of the late Raja Sharda Mahesh Narain Singh Shah of Agori Barhar, Raj, Tehsil Robertsgunj in Mirzapur district. Raja Anand Brahma Shah who was a Malgujar of more than Rs. 10,000 annually executed Gujaranama deeds in favour of his younger brothers and his mother separately in the year 1949. By these deeds certain villages were transferred by the Raja to the Raj Kumar and the mother in lieu of their rights of maintenance. One of such Gujaranamas was executed by Raja Anand Brahma Shah in favour of respondent, Raj Kumar Rukhmini Raman Brahma who is one of his younger brothers. The document was executed on October 5, 1949 and registered on January 18, 1950. The application of the respondent before the Rehabilitation Grants Officer was opposed by the appellant. The objection of the appellant was that the transfer in favour of the respondent cannot be legally recognised in view of Section 23 (1) (a) of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (U. P. Act 1 of 1951) (hereinafter called the Act) for the purpose of assessing the amount of rehabilitation grant. By his order dated January 28, 1961 the Rehabilitation Grants Officer held that the respondent was entitled to rehabilitation grant. The appellant preferred an appeal against the order of the Re-habilitation Grant Officer. The appeal was heard by the Additional Civil Judge, Mirzapur, who rejected the objection of the appellant and dismissed the appeal. The appellant took the matter in revision to the Allahabad High Court, but the Revision Application was dismissed on February 16, 1965.

3. It is necessary at this stage to set out the relevant provisions of the Act : Section 3 (12) :

"In this Act, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context-

x x x x x

(12) Intermediary with reference to any estate means a proprietor under-proprietor, sub-proprietor, thekedar, permanent lessee in Avadh and permanent tenure-holder of such estate or part thereof."

4. Section 23:

"Transfer by way of sale or gift not to be recognised -

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any law, no transfer, by way of sale or gift, of any estate or part thereof

(a) made on or after the first day of July, 1948, shall be recognised for the purpose of assessing the amount of rehabilitation grant payable to the intermediary; -

(2) Nothing in sub-section (1) shall apply to -

(a) any sale made under order of a Court in execution of any decree or order for payment of money; or

(b) any sale or gift made in favour of a wakf, trust, endowment or society established wholly for charitable purposes, unless the State Government in any particular case directs otherwise."

5. Section 24 (b) -

"Any contract or agreement made between an intermediary and any person on or after the first day of July, 1948, which has the effect directly or indirectly,

(a)* * * * *

(b) of entitling an intermediary to receive on account of rehabilitation grant an amount higher than what he would, but for the contract or agreement be entitled to under this Act shall be made and is hereby declared null and void."

6. Section 73 :

"There shall be paid by the State Government to every intermediary (other than a thekedar), whose estate or estates have been acquired under the provisions of this Act, a rehabilitation grant as hereinafter provided;

Provided that, where on the date immediately preceding the date of vesting, the aggregate land revenue payable by the i