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

2023 Supreme(SC) 536

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SURYA KANT, J.K. MAHESHWARI, JJ.
State of Uttarakhand and Anr. – Appellant
Versus
Ravi Kumar (Deceased) through LRs and others – Respondent
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4983 OF 2009, CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4988 OF 2009, CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4984 OF 2009, CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4985 OF 2009, WITH CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 165-168 OF 2007, IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4983 OF 2009, CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4989-4992 OF 2009
Decided On : 18-05-2023

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. A. Venayagam Balan, AOR Mr. Krishnam Mishra, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Adv. Mr. Ashiwan Mishra, Adv. Mr. Kamlendra Mishra, AOR Mr. Atul Sharma, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, AOR Mr. Satyajit A Desai, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Gautam, Adv. Mr. Abhinav K. Mutyalwar, Adv. Mr. Gajanan N Tirthkar, Adv. Mr. Vijay Raj Singh Chouhan, Adv. Mr. Yougant Dhillon, Adv. Ms. Anagha S. Desai, AOR Ms. Aishwarya Shinde, Adv. Mr. A. Venayagam Balan, AOR Mr. P. N. Gupta, AOR For M/S. Ap & J Chambers, AOR

Headnote:(A) Government Grants Act, 1895 - U.P. Tenancy Act, 1939 - U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 - Questions of ownership, tenancy, and the validity of leasehold - The case entails issues relating to the lawful ownership and tenancy rights concerning the land leased since 1924, with key events spanning across various legislative frameworks and administrative actions leading to contested claims of title. (Paras 1-60)

(B) Eviction and Mutation Proceedings - Examination of procedural and substantive rights regarding occupancy and possession - The historical context and dealings with the land, including recognized tenancy statuses, actual possession, and requisite permissions from the Deputy Commissioner, formed a critical background for resolving disputes. (Paras 1-38)

(C) Remand and Further Hearings - Observations emphasized the importance of thorough factual examination and adherence to legal propriety in determining ownership and rights associated with leasehold agreements. Further proceedings mandated for effective adjudication in view of prolonged litigation. (Paras 57-62)

Table of Content
1. ownership of suit land. (Para 1 , 2)
2. chronology of lease and sale events. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
3. expunction of revenue entries. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
4. maintaining status quo amidst ongoing litigation. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
5. high court judgments on land rights. (Para 20 , 21 , 22)
6. trial and appellate court decisions. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26)
7. compensation related to land acquisition. (Para 27 , 28 , 29)
8. legal contentions of appellants and respondents. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33)
9. legal status of sale and leasehold rights. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38)
10. validity of conditions under the lease. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42)
11. open questions regarding approval for transfer. (Para 43 , 44 , 45 , 46)
12. role of revenue entries in ownership claims. (Para 47 , 48 , 49 , 50)
13. questions of occupancy tenancy and transferability. (Para 51 , 52 , 53 , 54)
14. review of tenancy laws applicability. (Para 55 , 56)
15. remand of the case for further proceedings. (Para 57 , 58)
16. direction for expeditious resolution by high court. (Para 59 , 60 , 61 , 62)

JUDGMENT :

Surya Kant, J.

1. The core question that arises for our consideration in the present set of connected matters pertains to the ownership of land measuring 183 bigha 8 biswa which is equivalent to 28.56 acres of land, bearing Khasra Nos. 2, 3/1, 3/2, 4 to 28/1, 28/2, to 49 and situated in Village Haripur, Tehsil Haldwani, District Nainital (hereinafter, ‘Suit Land’).

2. Since these appeals arise out of a complex factual scenario and different sets of legal proceedings which proceeded in parallel, it would be appropriate to discuss the same at length before delving into the issue of law, which require adjudication before us.

A. FACTS

A.1 THE COMMON FACTS: 1924 SALE DEED, 1967 EVICTION SUIT AND 1978 MUTATION PROCEEDINGS

3. The genesis of these disputes began on 20.06.1924, when one Mr. John Vaughn, son of Mr. Charles Vaughn obtained a lease of the Suit Land (hereinafter, ‘1924 Lease Deed’) from the erstwhile colonial rulers through the Secretary of State for India in Council for thirty years on payment of rent as agreed between the parties. The lease was also extendable for another thirty years and was subject to certain conditions, which are reproduced as follows: -

    “X-X-X-X

    (a) The lessee to pay the first period of thirty years the yearly rental of No.183-6-4 clear of all deductions on the first-day of March in each year at the Haldwani Tehsil or at such other place as the Deputy Commissioner of Nainital shall form time to time appoint in this behalf and also from time to time and at all times during the continuance of the said lease pay and discharge all rates, taxes, charges and assessment of every description which are now or may at any time hereafter during the said lease be assessed, charged or imposed upon the land hereby demised.

    (b) Lessee agree that the said plot of land will be used for residential purposes, for poultry farming for orchards and for vegetable cultivation only.

    (c) The lessee agrees that he will submit the plan of any building which he wish to erect or of any existing building which he has to modify to the Deputy Commissioner of Nainital for approval before starting building operations, that he will complete the sanctioned building within two years of the receipt of approval and that he will keep every building erected by him and also the Government buildings standing on the said plot of land and shown on the plan annexed in good and substantial repair and condition both externally and internally.

    (d) The lessee agrees that he shall not claim the benefits which agricultural tenant and lessees are given in the Tarai and Bhaber estates.

    (e) The lessee agrees that he will not transfer or sublet said plot of land without the written approval of the Deputy Commissioner of Nainital.

    (f) The lessee agrees that he shall be


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