Panchapagesa Sastri, J.-The plaintiff is the appellant. He brings this suit under section 173 of the Madras Estates Land Act. The relief which he claims is that the suit lands and the Hill described in the Schedule to the plaint are not Inam lands forming part of the Agraharam of Maradikotta but are the jeroyiti lands and hill of the Estate of Farlakimedi being part of the village of Kuddaba. His case is that the Inam grant in village of Maradikotta was confirmed by the Inam Commissioner as an inam grant only with reference to an area of 451 acres 94 cents only out of a total area of 750 acres 29 cents of the said village, and that the lands and hill set out in the schedule, are not included in the area or confirmed as Inam grant but come within the area excluded from the grant. Whatever was excluded from the Inam grant formed part of the estate of Parlakimedi which belongs to the plaintiff. There appears to have been a survey of this estate in 1910 or 1912. Some portions were however omitted by oversight from the said survey and in 1933-34 the Government ordered survey of the area so omitted by oversight. The plaintiff’s present case is that the items described in the plaint schedule together with the forest lands in the village of Maradikotta were all surveyed under the provisions of Act VIII of 1923 as part of the Jeroyiti village of Kuddaba and final notification under section 13 of the said Act was published on 15th August, 1936. Under the said notification, it was announced that the survey notified shall be conclusive proof that the boundaries determined and recorded therein had been correctly determined and recorded unless modified by a suit in a Civil Court under the provisions of section 14 of Act VIII of 1923. The contesting defendants who are the Inamdars of the village did not file a suit within three years to have the survey modified. But in the course of the settlement proceedings which were taking place they appear to have appeared before the Settlement Officer and claimed that the suit lands and hill formed part of the inam in their favour and the rights should be recognised. The Settlement Officer notwithstanding the survey aforesaid which included these in the jeroyiti portion of Kuddaba village recognised the claims of the Inamdars of Maradikotta to the lands and hill in question and passed an order in their favour. Against that order a revision petition filed under section 172 of the Estates Land Act on behalf of the plaintiff to the Board of Revenue was also dismissed by the Board on 21st May, 1941. Thereafter the present suit was filed for a declaration that the suit lands and hill formed part of Jeroyiti village of Kuddaba.

The Inamdars contested the suit. According to them the agraharam village of Maradikotta was a grant of the whole village of the total extent of 750 acres 29 cents and not as averred by the plaintiff of a portion of it amounting to 451 acres 84 cents only. The latter extent was taken as the extent of the cultivable area for the purpose of calculating quit rent. But the grant was of the entire village. They denied the suit lands and hill were excluded from the grant. They denied the binding character of the order in the survey proceedings and stated that the notification of 15th August, 1936, was not valid and binding on the agraharamdars. They relied upon the recognition of their rights in the settlement proceedings by the Officer who conducted the proceedings under the same G.O. which authorised the survey and settlement of record also and stated that the finality attached to the survey order under section 13 of the Act was not attracted. The Court below raised appropriate issues on these pleadings. It found that the suit hill, item 6 in the plaint, was not included in the grant to the Inamdars, and that they were not in possession of the same. At the same time, the lower Court found that the suit lands of about 50 acres and thereabouts comprised in S.Nos.225, 226, 231 and 233 and S. N

Click Here to Read the rest of this document