JUDGMENT - C.J. R.M. KANTAWALA, J.:---The Division Bench consisting of Deshmukh and Sapre, J. by its judgment and order dated 14th/15th July, 1975 has referred the following question for determination by the Full Bench :

"When an alienation like the service inam in this case was a grant to a family in the name of senior member and the same is abolished, whether the provisions of section 4 of the Bombay Merged Territories Miscellaneous Alienation Abolition Act, 1955, extinguish the ordinary rights and incidents in respect of such alienation under the personal law of the parties?"

The dispute in this appeal relates to lands pertaining to service inam. Originally the grant was to one Gangadhar and after his death an heirship enquiry was started in the year 1859. As a result thereof, the name of Narhari, his son, was entered as Navawala in respect of service inam by an order dated May 10, 1889. The genealogy of Narhari Gangadhar is as under :---

NARHAR GANGADHAR

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | | |

Sadashiv (died in 1959) Shankarrao Balkrishna Madhav

wife Laxmibai (deft. 9) (died in 1945) (died in 1952) (died in 1933)

| | | | |

Satyabhamabai Rukhminibai | | |

(deft. 10) (deft. 11) | | |

-------------------------------------- | | | | | |

Ganesh (plff. 1) Vithal (Plff. 4) | |

| | |

-------------------------------- | |

| | | |

Yeshwant (plff. 2) Srikant (Plff. 3) | |

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | | | |

Govind Waman Chintaman Vyankatesh Prabhakar |

(Deft. 1) (Deft. 2) (Deft. 3) (Deft. 4) (Deft. 5) |

-------------------------------------------------------

| | |

Shripad Narayan Vishnu

(Deft. 6) (Deft. 7) (Deft. 8)

After the death of Narhari in the year 1919 the proceedings initiated at the instance of the Chief Saheb of Ichalkaranji showed that he was dissatisfied with the services rendered by the existing members of the Date family i.e. Narharis and Gangadhars family. It was also found that there was no able person in the family who could render service. In view thereof the inam was resumed and the lands were cultivated through the State. On or about January 5, 1928, Sadashiv the eldest son of Narhari, made an application to the Chief Saheb that the inam may be revived and services may be accepted from Date family. Sadashiv himself was unable to render service and offered that his younger brother Balkrishna was able and competent as well as willing to render such service. After reviving the Vatan in the name of Sadashiv the services of Balkrishna were accepted. Balkrishna also gave a writing to the that he was willing to render service on behalf of his brother. This agreement continued till 1943 when the rendering of services was cancelled. Thereafter it was not necessary to render such service. There were two pieces of land pertaining to this inam, one being Survey No. 28/1 situate at lchalkaranji and the other being survey No. 661/5 situate at village Lat. As Balkrishna was put into possession of these lands upon revival of Vatan, his possession continued till the Bombay Merged Territories Miscellaneous Alienations Abolition Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "The Act") was passed whereby alienation was abolished altogether. Balkrishna died in the year 1952 and after his death the two inam lands continued to be in possession of his heirs who are defendants Nos. 1 to 5. The plaintiffs who are the sons and grand sons of Shankarrao, one of the sons of Narhari filed a suit for partition and possession of their one fourth share in two inam lands and for past and future mesne profits. They pointed that orders were already passed in respect of regrant of one of the pieces of land, namely, Survey No. 28/1 from Ichalkaranji and the regrant in the case of Survey No. 661/5 of village Lat was kept pending by the Revenue Authorities as

Click Here to Read the rest of this document