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

1927 Supreme(Mad) 74

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
K Sastri
Archaka Sundara Raju Dikshatulu
Versus
Archaka Seshadri Dikshatulu
Decided On : 8 February, 1927

The central legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between valid and voidable leases for temple service lands, emphasizing the inalienability of such lands and the implications on the successor in office.

Headnote:

Khanda Bhogiam - Archaka Service Inam Lands - Inam Register, Transfer of Property Act - The court discussed the validity of a Khanda Bhogiam deed executed for archaka service inam lands, interpreting the nature of the transaction as a lease and its implications on the alienability of the lands. The court referred to previous decisions and legal principles to determine the validity of the lease, highlighting the inalienability of temple service lands and the distinction between valid and voidable leases.

Fact of the Case:

Plaintiff filed a suit to declare a Khanda Bhogiam deed for archaka service inam lands as invalid and to obtain possession of the properties. Defendant claimed the alienation was valid and supported by consideration. The Subordinate Judge dismissed the plaintiff's suit.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the Khanda Bhogiam deed to be a lease, satisfying the requirements of a lease as defined in the Transfer of Property Act. It held that the lease was voidable at the option of the plaintiff, who did not repudiate it upon assuming office. The court also discussed the inalienability of temple service lands and the distinction between valid and voidable leases.

Issues: Validity of Khanda Bhogiam deed for archaka service inam lands, nature of the transaction as a lease or mortgage, inalienability of temple service lands, and the plaintiff's election to avoid the lease.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined the nature of the Khanda Bhogiam deed as a lease and discussed the inalienability of temple service lands, emphasizing the distinction between valid and voidable leases. It also considered the plaintiff's actions regarding the lease upon assuming office.

Final Decision: The appeal failed, and the court dismissed it without costs, holding the Khanda Bhogiam deed as a voidable lease and finding the plaintiff bound by the lease due to his actions.

JUDGMENT

Kumaraswami Sastri, J.

1. Plaintiff is the appellant. He filed a suit for a declaration that the Khanda Bhogiam deed executed by his adoptive father in respect of the lands mentioned in the plaint which are archaka service inam is invalid and for possession of the properties. His case was that the lands are archaka service inam lands granted to his ancestors for the purpose of doing service in Tirumalai Tirupathi Devasthanam, that, on the death of his adoptive father, the plaintiff succeeded to the hereditary office, that as archaka of the temple he is entitled to hold the lands free from any encumbrance, and that his adoptive father purporting to act for himself and as guardian of the plaintiff executed the Khanda Bhogiam deed, dated the 21st of February, 1913, whereby the 1st defendant was put in possession of the properties for a term of 30 years in consideration of a sum of Rs. 8,225 alleged to have been paid to the father. The plaintiff also states that there was no consideration for the deed, that the debts are not true and binding on him, that the deed is further invalid as having been taken from the plaintiffs father who was an old and orthodox person of weak mind, ignorant of worldly affairs and completely under the" influence of the 1st defendant, that the property being service inam is not alienable and that the document even if supported by consideration will not be valid beyond the lifetime of the holder of the office. The defence was that the alienation was valid and supported by consideration, that the lands comprised in the deed are alienable and that the lease deed is valid and binding. It is also alleged that the plaintiff with full knowledge ratified the lease after the death of his father and that he is estopped from disputing its validity. The Subordinate Judge dismissed the plaintiffs suit. He held that the consideration mentioned in the document was paid, that there was no undue influence or fraud in the matter, that, though the lands are inam lands, there was a custom of alienability, and that even apart from any such custom the lease of the lands is valid and binding and it is not an alienation prohibited by law. The plaintiff appeals.

2. It is not disputed that the lands in question are lands granted as inam to the person who holds the office of archaka. It is clear from Ex. B, extract from the Inam Register, Exs. C and E) as well as Ex. A that service was to be rendered. Exs. C and D, which are as far back as 1822, prohibit alienation even by lease but it is doubtful whether these orders would in law render leases invalid in the absence of anything in the grant and as a matter of fact it is not disputed that there have been several dealings with this property by way of Ijar or lease. Ex. I is the Khanda Bhogiam deed which is impeached. It is dated the 21st February, 1913. Its genuineness is not disputed, It recites that the amount due by the plaintiffs father was Rs. 8,225 and that he was unable to pay the amount and has no other income except the income got from the village described in the schedule, possession was delivered of the Inam village for a period of 30 years from fasli 1323 to fasli 1353. This document refers to a previous document of the 12th of April, 1910. As regards the enjoyment and payment of rent the deed runs as follows Therefore you shall enjoy the said village from this time forwards and you yourself shall discharge the above-mentioned debts. From this time forwards you yourself shall collect all the income that has been collected by us in the said village. We have nothing to do with the profit and loss occurring in the same. You shall have all the rights held by us in the said village for this Khanda Bhogiam period of 30 years for collecting arrears from the ryots in the said village. You shall pay the kists payable to the Sircar (Government) on the said village and obtain receipts. You should give the receipts to us after (he Khanda Bhogiam period, that is when the said



















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
whatsapp-icon Back to top