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

1969 Supreme(AP) 154

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : A.GOPAL RAO, PARTHASARATHI
Palacharala Hymavathamma - Appellant
Versus
Revenue Divisional Officer, Parvatipuram - Respondent
Decided On : 11-25-69

The expression "revenue accounts" in the Inams Abolition Act includes all forms of accounts and registers kept by the village establishments pursuant to the statutory provisions, as well as the accounts kept at the higher levels of the official hierarchy and which have a bearing on the assessment and collection of revenue.

Headnote:

REVENUE ACCOUNTS - DEFINITION AND SCOPE - INAM ABOLITION ACT - INTERPRETATION - REVENUE ACCOUNTS INCLUDE REGISTERS AND DOCUMENTS MAINTAINED BY VILLAGE ESTABLISHMENT - ENQUIRY INTO REVENUE ACCOUNTS EXTENDS FROM ORIGIN OF GRANT TO DATE OF ABOLITION - ENTRIES IN INAM FAIR REGISTER ARE WITHIN PURVIEW OF REVENUE ACCOUNTS - AMBIGUOUS ENTRIES IN REVENUE ACCOUNTS CAN BE CLARIFIED BY CONSIDERING OTHER RELEVANT EVIDENCE.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner challenged the decision of the Revenue Divisional Officer, who affirmed the decision of the Inams Tahsildar, that the village of Krishnapuram was an inam village within the meaning of the Inams Abolition Act. The petitioner contended that the tribunals failed to take into account the entire evidence bearing on the question of whether Krishnapuram was an inam village and that the decision was based solely on the entry in the alphabetical list of villages, which could not be classified as a revenue account.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the expression "revenue accounts" in the Inams Abolition Act includes all forms of accounts and registers kept by the village establishments pursuant to the statutory provisions, as well as the accounts kept at the higher levels of the official hierarchy and which have a bearing on the assessment and collection of revenue. The court further held that the entries in the Inam Fair Register are also within the purview of revenue accounts and that if the entries in the revenue accounts are ambiguous and do not afford the basis for a sure conclusion, it is incumbent on the Tribunal to consider other pieces of evidence, which are relevant under the Evidence Act.

Issues: 1. Whether the decision of the Revenue Divisional Officer was in conformity with the provisions of the Inams Abolition Act. 2. Whether the tribunals failed to take into account the entire evidence bearing on the question of whether Krishnapuram was an inam village. 3. Whether the decision was based solely on the entry in the alphabetical list of villages.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The expression "revenue accounts" in the Inams Abolition Act includes all forms of accounts and registers kept by the village establishments pursuant to the statutory provisions, as well as the accounts kept at the higher levels of the official hierarchy and which have a bearing on the assessment and collection of revenue. 2. The entries in the Inam Fair Register are also within the purview of revenue accounts. 3. If the entries in the revenue accounts are ambiguous and do not afford the basis for a sure conclusion, it is incumbent on the Tribunal to consider other pieces of evidence, which are relevant under the Evidence Act.

Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed and the matter was remitted to the Revenue Divisional Officer for a fresh disposal of the appeal in the light of the observations made by the court.

PARTHASARATHI, J.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition has been directed t be posted before a Division Bench on a reference made by Basireddi, J,, When the matter came up before him in the first instance, he came to the conclusion that a question of some importance and which recurs, often, arises for consideration in this case. The learned Judge though that it is necessary to have a clarification or definition of the expression revenue account which occurs in the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Inams (abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act (1956) hereinafter referred t as the Inams Abolition Act.

( 2 ) THE facts that have given rise to this writ petition lie within a narrow compass. In the affidavit filed by the formed it is stated that the village of Korapa formed part of the Zamindari estate of Salur, and that in the distant past a grant was made of a part of the village, and that the area, which was the subject-matter of the grant, constituted a hamlet of the village of Korapa. The portion so granted, was named Krishnapuram. The grant was recognised by the Government and a title deed No. 72, dated 22-1-964 was granted after the inquiry by the Inam Commission. The case of the petitioner is that the entries in the inam fair Register as also the Inam Title deed described the inam as Krishnapuram, hamlet of Korapa.

( 3 ) THE petitioners predecessor-in-title acquired title to Krishnapuram in the year 1873 by purchase; and since then, the possession thereof has been held by the petitioner and her predecessors It is averred by the petitioner that when disputes arose between the tenants and the inamdar suits for eviction has been filed on several occasions and decrees for eviction were obtained and decrees for eviction were obtained in numerous instances. In those proceedings, the defence raised by the tenancy that they acquired occupancy rights was negatived by the courts and adjudication rested on the basis that Krishnapuram was not an estate within the meaning of the Madras Estates Land Act. The petitioner also referred in the affidavit the decisions under the Madras Act 30 of 1947 and the Madras Act 26 of 1948. Under the latter Act, 26 of 1948l. Under as a result of the suo motu enquiry, that the inam is not an estate. After the commencement of the Inams Abolition Act the Inam Tashildar, Bobili commenced that Krishnapuram constitutes as inam village within the meaning of the Inams Abolition Act. This decision was confirmed on appeal by the Revenue Divisional Officer Parvathipuram. The writ petitioner is based on the ground among others that the tribunals failed to take into account the relevant material. It is urged that he decision rested entire on the alphabetical list of villages. Which according to the petitioner cannot be classified as a revenue account. The decision is based on irreliable date and ignores large volume of evidence which the tribunals were bound to take into account.

( 4 ) IN the counter-affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent in the writ petitioner it is submitted that the predecessors of the petitioner held only the melwaram interest and that it no time did they hold any larger lager interest in the inam. . It is also stated in the counter-affidavit that Krishnapuram a village e with comes within the definition an inam village under the Inams Abolition Act.

( 5 ) THE main question that arises for consideration in this writ petitions whether the decision of the Revenue Divisional Officer affirming that of the Inams Tahsildar is in conformity with the provisions of the Act. The contention urged on behalf of the petitioner is that the Tribunal failed to take into account the entire evidence bearing on the control very. The criticism is that the decision is based on a rejection of relevant evidence and solely on the entry in the alphabetical list of villages. Neither all the revenue accounts had been taken into consideration, nor did the tribunal take cognizance of other material which is relevant for the education of th












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