Judgement

CHINNAPPA REDDY, J.:- The question raised in the several appeals is primarily that of the vires of S. 44 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 as amended by the Karnataka Land Reforms (Amendment) Act 1 of 1974. In order to appreciate the submissions made to us, it will be useful to set out the relevant provisions of the Act before it was amended by Act 1 of 1974. Section 2(6) as it stood before the amendment defined "basic holding" as meaning land which was equal to two standard acres. "Ceiling area" was defined as meaning land which was equal to eighteen standard acres. "Court" was defined to mean the Court of Munsif within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the land was situate. "Family holding" was defined as meaning land equal to six standard acres. "Small holder" was defined to mean a land owner owning land not exceeding two basic holdings whose total net annual income including the income from such land did not exceed one thousand two hundred rupees. "Standard acre" was defined to mean one acre of the first class of land or an extent equivalent thereto consisting of any one or more classes of land specified in Part A of Schedule I determined in accordance with the formula in Part B of the said Schedule. Chapter II (Ss. 4 to 43) contained General provisions relating to Tenancies and Chapter III (Ss. 44 to 62) dealt with Conferment of ownership on tenants. Section 5 prohibited the creation or continuation of any tenancy in respect of any land after the appointed day and barred the leasing of land for any period whatsoever. It was, however, provided that (a) any small holder might create or continue a tenancy or lease the land owned by him and (b) any land owner who was a minor, a widow, an unmarried woman, a person incapable of cultivating land by reason of any physical or mental disability or a soldier in service in the Armed Forces of the Union or a seaman, might create or continue the tenancy or lease the land owned by him or her. It was further provided that tenancies of resumable lands could be continued until the dispossession of the tenants under S. 14 and of non-resumable land until the date of vesting under S. 44. Section 14 provided for resumption of lands from tenants. Sub-secs. (1), (4) and (6) of S. 14 may be usefully extracted here. Sub-secs. (2), (3) and (5) do not appear to be necessary for the purposes of the present case. Sub-ss. (1), (4) and (6) were as follows :-

"14, Resumption of land from tenants(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in Ss. 22 and 43, but subject to the provisions of this section and of Ss. 15, 16, 17, 18, 49, 20 and 41, a landlord may, if he bona fide requires land, other than land referred to in the first proviso to Cl. (29) of sub-s. (A) of S. 2,

(i) for cultivating personally, or

(ii) for any non-agricultural purpose, file with the Court a statement indicating the land or lands owned by him and which he intends to resume and such other particulars as may be prescribed. On such statement being filed, the Court shall, as soon as may be after giving an opportunity to be heard to the landlord and such of his tenants and other persons as may be affected, and, having due regard to contiguity, fertility and fair distribution of lands, and after making such other inquiries as the Court deems necessary, determine the land or lands, which the landlord shall be entitled to resume, and shall issue a certificate to the landlord to the effect that the land or lands specified in such certificate has been reserved for resumption; and thereupon the right to resume possession shall be exercisable only in respect of the lands specified in such certificate and shall not extend to any other land.

Explanation :- Subject to such rules as may be prescribed, the Court within the jurisdiction of which the greater part of the land held by the landlord is situated shall be the Court competent to issue a certificate under this section."

(2) and (3) xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx

(4) In respect of tenan