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

1972 Supreme(Ker) 71

Judges : SIKRI,J.M.SHELAT,RAY,DUA,KHANNA
KANNAN DEVAN HILLS PRODUCE CO.LTD. - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA - Respondent
Case No : W. P. No. 44 of 1971
Decided On : 04/27/1972
Advocates Appeared :
M. C. Chagla; For Petitioner M. M. Abdul Khader; For Respondent

Headnote:

Judgment: Kannan Devan Hills Produce Company Ltd. - Legislative Competence of State of Kerala - Kannan Devan Hills (Resumption of Lands) Act, 1971 (Kerala Act 5 of 1971) - Art.31A of the Constitution - Summary: The petitioner, Kannan Devan Hills Produce Company Ltd., brought a petition under Art.32 of the Constitution, challenging the legislative competence of the State of Kerala and the protection of the impugned Act under Art.31A. The petitioner was in possession of an area of approximately 1,27,904 acres, commonly known as the 'Concession Area' lying contiguously in the Kannan Devan Hills village. The impugned Act aimed to resume agricultural lands for distribution for cultivation and ancillary purposes. The court analyzed the terms of the Second Pooniat Concession and the Royal Proclamation of 1899, which affected the petitioner's rights. The court examined the legislative competence of the State and found that the impugned Act fell within the State's power to legislate on land reforms under entry 18 of List II and entry 42 of List III. The court also considered the potential conflict with the Tea Act, 1953, and concluded that the impugned Act was not repugnant to the Tea Act. The court further analyzed whether the lands acquired by the impugned Act fell within the definition of 'Janmam right' or 'estate' under Art.31A(2) and found that they did. The court also determined that the impugned Act was a law for effecting agrarian reforms, as it aimed to reserve lands for promoting agriculture and the welfare of the agricultural population and to settle agriculturists and agricultural laborers. The court held that the impugned Act was protected from challenge under Art.31A. - Fact of the Case: The petitioner, Kannan Devan Hills Produce Company Ltd., challenged the legislative competence of the State of Kerala and the protection of the impugned Act under Art.31A. The petitioner was in possession of an area of approximately 1,27,904 acres, commonly known as the 'Concession Area' lying contiguously in the Kannan Devan Hills village. - Finding of the Court: The court found that the impugned Act fell within the State's power to legislate on land reforms and was not repugnant to the Tea Act, 1953. The court also determined that the lands acquired by the impugned Act fell within the definition of 'Janmam right' or 'estate' under Art.31A(2) and that the impugned Act was a law for effecting agrarian reforms. The court held that the impugned Act was protected from challenge under Art.31A. - Issues: The issues before the court were the legislative competence of the State of Kerala, the potential conflict with the Tea Act, 1953, and the protection of the impugned Act under Art.31A. - Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the analysis of the impugned Act in relation to the State's legislative competence, the potential conflict with the Tea Act, 1953, and the determination of the lands' classification under Art.31A(2). The court's interpretation of the impugned Act as a law for effecting agrarian reforms was a key legal provision that influenced the decision. - Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition, holding that the impugned Act was protected from challenge under Art.31A. - Main Legal Point: The central legal point established in the judgment is that the impugned Act was a law for effecting agrarian reforms and was protected from challenge under Art.31A. - Category: Constitutional Law - Sub-Category: Legislative Competence and Land Reforms

Judgment :-

1. Two main points arise in this petition under Art.32 of the Constitution, brought by the Kannan Devan Hills Produce Company Ltd., hereinafter referred to as the petitioner: (1) Whether the Kannan Devan Hills (Resumption of Lands) Act, 1971 (Kerala Act 5 of 1971) - hereinafter referred to as the impugned Act - is within the legislative competence of the State of Kerala; and (2) whether the impugned Act is protected from challenge under Art.31A of the Constitution, and if so, to what extent.

2. The petitioner is in possession of an area of approximately 1,27,904 acres, commonly known as the 'Concession Area' lying contiguously in the Kannan Devan Hills village. The petitioner grows and manufactures tea in the plantation set up and developed by it. The petitioner's predecessor-in-title was one Mr. John Danial Munro, who obtained, what is called, the first Pooniat Concession from Punhatil Koyikal Keal Varma Valuja Raja, on July 11,1877 (Mithu-cam 20,1052). This concession recited that an application was made for the grant of the above property to the Raja for coffee cultivation. The concession conveyed the properties in consideration of Rs. 5,000/-. It was further stipulated in the Concession that "thou shall clear and remove the jungles, and reclaim the waste lands within the said boundaries, and cultivate them with coffee up to the year 1058 and from the year 1059, pay current collector a yearly rent at the rate of 3,000 British Rupees." Various other conditions were mentioned but it is not necessary to refer to them because this concession was superseded by another agreement called the Second Pooniat Concession.

3. Refore we refer to the terms of the Second Pooniat Concession, we may mention that H. H. the Maharaja executed a deed of ratification, dated November 28,1878, by which the Government ratified the First Pooniat Concession dated July 11, 1877. This deed of ratification laid down the terms and conditions in regard to Government assessment and other matters under which the Government permitted the grantee to hold the land. These terms and conditions were declared in the Deed to be independent of any rents or payments due to the Poonjar Chief under the Grantee's Agreement with him.

4. Clause 5 of the Deed of Ratification is important. It provides, inter alia, that "the limits of the grant all timber except the following and such as may hereafter be reserved namely, Teak, Cole Teak, Blackwood, Ebony, Karoonthaly Sandalwood; should he carry any timber without the limits of the grant it will be subject to the payment of Kooteekanom, or Customs Duty "

The eleventh clause reads;

"The land granted shall be held in perpetuity as heritable or transferable property, but every case of transfer of the grant by the grantee shall be immediately made known to the Sircar, who shall have the right of apportioning the tax, if a portion of the holding is transferred."

The Twelfth clause stipulates:

"The discovery of useful mines and treasures within the limits of the grant shall be communicated to the Sircar, and the grantee shall in respect to such mines and treasures, abide by the decision of the Sircar."

The sixteenth clause provides:

"The grantee shall be bound to preserve the forest trees growing on the banks of the principal streams running through the tract to the extent of fifty yards in breadth on each side of the stream, the underwood only being permitted to be cleared and coffee planted instead. Similarly he shall also be bound to preserve the trees about the crest of the hill to the extent of a quarter of a mile on each side."

5. On August 2,1886, the agreement called the Second Pooniat Concession was entered into modifying the previous deed of ratification. It appears that by this time a company called the North Travancore Land Planting and Agricultural Society, Ltd. had acquired the rights in the said land from John Daniel Munro. The Land Revenue Manual (Vol 3, Part I, Revised Edition 1936, p. 7) summarises the main provi

























































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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