Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R. BANUMATHI, INDIRA BANERJEE, JJ.
Janardan Dagdu Khomane and Another – Appellants
versus
Eknath Bhiku Yadav & Ors. – Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2607 OF 2013
Decided On : 18-09-2019
(A) Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 – Sections 32(G) and 88B – Public Trust – Exemption from purchase – Appellants are trustees of a public trust – Appellants contend that Section 32 has no application to land held by a Public Trust – Therefore, a tenant on land held by a Public Trust does not become purchaser either on “Tillers day” or on any subsequent date – High Court quashed exemption certificate and directed authorities concerned to hold proceedings under Section 32 G of 1948 Act to fix purchase price at an early date – In view of definition of ‘Public Trust’ in Public Trusts Act which also includes constructive trust either for a public religious or charitable purpose, absence of a deed of trust would not make any difference to position of Trust as a “public trust” – A constructive trust arises by operation of law, without regard to intention of parties to create a trust – It does not require a deed signifying institution of trust – Under a constructive trust, trust arises by operation of law as from date of circumstances which give rise to it – Function of court is only to declare that such a trust has arisen in past – Trust has rightly been registered under Public Trusts Act, after due enquiry – However, all public trusts are not entitled, as of right, to exemption under Section 88B of 1948 Act – Said section only applies to lands which are property of a trust for educational purpose or for public religious purpose provided such trust is deemed to be registered or is registered under Public Trusts Act – A Trust for a religious purpose has right to own and acquire property – However, such property may be taken away by authority of law – Judgment and order passed by High Court affirmed. (Paras 7, 17, 32, 33, 39, 40, 47 and 48)
(B) Equity Jurisprudence – Constructive trust can arise over a wide range of situations – Constructive trust is a formula through which conscience of equity finds expression. (Para 34)
Facts of Case:
Appellants are the trustees of Shree Maruti Deo Trust Pimpli Limtek, registered as a public trust under Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. Instant appeal is against a final judgment and order dated 6th February, 2006, whereby a Division Bench of Bombay High Court allowed Writ Petition filed Respondent Nos.1,2 and 3, and directed the concerned authorities to hold proceedings under Section 32(G) of Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 to fix purchase price of 6 acres and 19 gunthas of lands at Pimpli Village in the Baramati Taluk in Pune district. short question in this appeal is, whether High Court was justified in quashing the Exemption Certificate issued by Collector in terms of Section 88B of the 1948 Act in favour of Trust, notwithstanding the fact that the suit property belonged to “an institution of public religious worship”.
Findings of Court:
legislature has, in its wisdom, very consciously provided that all public trusts registered under the provisions of the enactments specified in Schedule ‘A’ & ‘AA’ to the Public Trusts Act shall be deemed to have been registered under Public Trusts Act. If it were the intention of legislature that all public trusts should be deemed to have been registered under the State Public Trusts Act, the legislature would have made an express provision to that effect. It is not for the Court to read into statute words and/or expressions which are not there in the statute.
Result : Appeal dismissed.
Understood. Please provide the legal document content (inside
JUDGMENT
Indira Banerjee, J.
1. This appeal is against a final judgment and order dated 6th February, 2006, whereby a Division Bench of Bombay High Court allowed Writ Petition No.1442 of 1987 filed by the Respondent Nos.1,2 and 3, and directed the concerned authorities to hold proceedings under Section 32(G) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 [hereinafter referred to as “the 1948 Act” to fix the purchase price of 6 acres and 19 gunthas of lands at Pimpli Village in the Baramati Taluk in Pune district, hereinafter referred to as the “said land”.
2. The appellants are the trustees of Shree Maruti Deo Trust Pimpli Limtek, registered as a public trust under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, hereinafter referred to as the “Public Trusts Act”. By amendment in 2012, the Public Trusts Act was renamed as “The Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950”. It is the case of the appellants that, since time immemorial, the said land has belonged to the Maruti Dev Temple. The said land is classified in the revenue records as Class III Devasthan Inam land belonging to the deity Maruti Dev. The suit property, according to the appellants, belongs to an institution of public religious worship.
3. There cannot be any dispute that the suit land belonged to the Devasthan. According to the appellants, initially in 1922, one Sitram Narayan Deshpande was put in possession of the suit land in view of the service rendered by him to the temple. Later, the land was let out to the forefathers of respondent nos. 1 to 4.
4. The respondent nos. 1 to 4, claim to be the tenants of the respondent nos. 5 and 6. The respondent nos. 1 to 4 claim to have been in possession of the said land on 1.4.1957 i.e. the “Tillers Day” under the 1948 Act, now known as the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act. The proforma respondents in this appeal, being the trustees of the Trust, were deleted from the array of parties by an order of this Court dated 13.2.2013.
5. The 1948 Act was amended by Bombay Act No. 15 of 1957, Bombay Act No. 38 of 1957 and Bombay Act No. 63 of 1958. The relevant amended sections provide:
“32. Tenants deemed to have purchased land on tillers’ day
(1) On the first day of April 1957 (hereinafter referred to as "the tillers day") every tenant shall, [subject to the other provisions of this section and the provisions of] the next succeeding sections, be deemed to have purchased from his landlord, free of all encumbrances subsisting thereon on the said day, the land held by him as tenant, if:
(a) such tenant is a permanent tenant thereof and cultivates land personally;
(b) such tenant is not a permanent tenant but cultivates land leased personally; and
(i) the landlord has not given notice of termination of his tenancy under section 31; or
(ii) notice has been given under section 31, but the landlord has not applied to the Mamlatdar on or before the 31st day of March 1957 under section 29 for obtaining possession of the land; or
(iii) the landlord has not terminated his tenancy on any of the grounds specified in section 14, or has so terminated the tenancy but has not applied to the Mamlatdar on or before the 31st day of March, 1957 under section 29 for obtaining possession of the lands:
32G. Tribunal to issue notices and determine price of land to be paid by tenants. (1) As soon as may be after the tillers’ day the Tribunal shall publish or cause to be published a public notice in the prescribed form in each village within its jurisdiction calling upon:
(a) all tenants who under section 32 are deemed to have purchased the lands,
(b) all landlords of such lands, and
(c) all other possession interested therein, to appear it on the date specified in the notice. The tribunal shall issue a notice individually to each such tenant, landlord and also, as far as practicable, other persons calling upon each other to appear before it on the date specified in the public notice.
(2) The Tribunal shall record in the prescribed manner the statement of the tenant
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
