2009 Supreme(SC) 853
Supreme Court of India
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE TARUN CHATTERJEE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.S. SIRPURKAR
V.G. Shankaranarayana Bhat
Versus
Girija (D) By Lrs. & Another
Civil Appeal No(s). 8334 of 2002
Decided on : 27-04-2009
For the Appellant:P. Krishna Moorhty, Sr. Advocate, Rajesh Mahale, Advocates.
For the Respondents:V.N. Raghupathy, Amit Kr. Chawla, Sanjay R. Hegde, Advocates.
Headnote:
Madras Cultivation and Tenant Protection Act, 1955 - Section 4 - Suit decree - Land case - Civil Appeal - A judgment passed by the High Court in Land Reforms Review Petition, dismissing the same, confirming the order passed by the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, which in turn had confirmed the order passed by the Land Tribunal, is in challenge in the present Appeal - Held, Some imaginary statements had been made to the effect that this fact must be within the knowledge of the petitioner - High Court has also fallen into error in holding that one had taken the property on lease and after his death, was cultivating the property on behalf of the family members - Court do not find any support to this strange finding in the record; at least Learned Counsel for the respondents was not able to justify this finding in any manner - Again, the High Court has fallen into total error in holding that the surrender order passed by the Court without being impleaded is a nullity in the eye of law - It has absolutely no basis - High Court was not called upon to decide the correctness of the surrender order - Appeal allowed.
Judgment :-
V.S. Sirpurkar, J.
1. A judgment passed by the Karnataka High Court in Land Reforms Review Petition, dismissing the same, confirming the order passed by the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, which in turn had confirmed the order passed by the Land Tribunal, Bantwal, is in challenge in the present Appeal. The said Revision was filed by the present appellants as the legal representatives of the original landlord.
2. One Govinda Bhat owned agricultural lands, which were leased in favour of one Kariyappa Gowda in 50s. Kariyappa Gowda cultivated the property as a tenant till his death. He had two wives, first being Akki Hengsu and through her, a daughter namely Laxmi Hengsu, and, second being Kali Hengsu and one son Jinnappa Gowda through her. Admittedly, Kariyappa Gowda died in 1960. At that time, his daughter Laxmi was already married and was living with her husband. After Kariyappa Gowda died, the property was being cultivated by Jinnappa Gowda, with whom there was an agreement dated 5.11.1961 for tenancy. The total land, which was being cultivated was 2 acres 17 cents. In the year 1962, Jinnappa Gowda surrendered major portion of this property by way of a Surrender Deed to the landlord. Only the area of 1.6 acres was left with Jinnappa Gowda. It has come on record that Jinnappa Gowda represented to the landlord that he was not able to cultivate the land for over 3 years and he expressed his desire to surrender the property. Therefore, a petition was filed before the Munsif Court and after examining the parties, an order came to be passed on 5.3.1968, permitting Jinnappa Gowda to surrender the lands under Section 4 of Madras Cultivation and Tenant Protection Act, 1955. So far so good.
3. Laxmi, the step sister of Jinnappa Gowda, however, filed a Civil Suit being O.S. 63 of 1968 and obtained an injunction on 25.3.1968 against the petitioner (appellant herein), restraining the appellant from interfering with her possession. An appeal was filed against the order, granting injunction vide appeal in M.A. 34 of 1968 on the file of Court of Civil Judge, Mangalore, which came to be decided by the Learned Civil Judge, holding that Laxmi could not be dispossessed. As against that, Civil Revision Petition Nos. 1670 and 1671 of 1968 were filed before the High Court. The High Court, however, without going into the merits of the case, directed the Trial Court to dispose of the main suit itself without reversing the decision of the lower Court, which had passed the order on merits. After the order of remand, the matter remained pending before the Munsif, who on application, appointed Laxmi as the Receiver. As against that order, the petitioner (appellant herein) preferred an appeal before the Court of Civil Judge, Mangalore, who remanded the matter on 9.1.1976 to the Land Tribunal, as the Tribunal had then come into existence owing to the 1974 Act. While the said suit was pending in the Court, Laxmi filed Form No. 7 application before the Land Tribunal, Bantwal in TNC No. 3216/74-75 against V.G. Shankaranarayana Bhat, who had succeeded the original landlord Govinda Bhat, who had expired, for conferral of occupancy rights. This suit was
also transferred to the Land Tribunal, as the earlier application was pending for declaration and also for grant of occupancy right in respect of the land in question.
4. The Land Tribunal, after enquiry, by its order dated 23.11.1984, rejected the claim of the first respondent herein, however, on humanitarian grounds, conferred the occupancy rights upon Laxmi in respect of the land bearing Survey No. 46/2 measuring 26 cents. Her claim in respect of the remaining land was, however, rejected, that being Survey No. 43/2 measuring 80 cents. The appellant herein filed a Writ Petition No. 10592 of 1985 before the High Court. Laxmi also filed a Writ Petition being Writ petition No. 5104 of 1985 against the order dated 23.11.1984. Both the petitions were clubbed and the matter was remanded to the Land Refor