Raghunandan Singh & Ors. VS. Brij Mohan Singh & Ors.

Summary

---

Terms of Theka empowering lease-holders to remain in possession of agricultural land-Appoint temporary tenants and recover Government Revenue-Thekadar whether a hereditary tenant.

The appellants who were originally the Zamindars of the land in dispute granted Thekas to the respondents first on the 10th July, 1933 and then on the 24th May, 1943. While the first Theka provided that the lease-holders were to remain in possession of the entire agricultural land either through themselves or by arranging with temporary tenants and by recovering government revenue, the second Theka though in the same terms, provided that the leaseholders would remain in possession of the agricultural land as lease-holders themselves and may appoint temporary tenants by receiving the government revenue.

The appellants succeeded before the Settlement officer (Consolidation), but the Deputy Director of Consolidation held in revision, that the appellants were Bhoomidars and the respondents could not get any status under Section 12 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellants in limine.

In the appeal to this Court it was submitted on behalf of the appellants that as the Theka granted by the Zamindars was not made with the lessees only for the purposes of personal cultivation of the lands the respondents would not fall within the ambit of section 12 of the Act, while on behalf of the respondents it was contended that as they were in cultivating possession of the lands in question, they had acquired the status of hereditary tenants conferred on them by section 12 of the Act and they were not Assamis as contemplated by section 13 of the Act.

Allowing the appeal,

^

HELD: 1. Before a person can be held to be a hereditary tenant under Section 12 of the Act, three conditions must be fulfilled: (1) He must be in possession of the land in dispute on the 1st May 1950, (2) His possession must be under a Theka and (3) The Theka must be for the purpose of personal cultivation of the lands in dispute by that person and not for other purposes. [1065C-D]

2. The dominant intention of the statute, as of other land reforms legislation, is to secure land for the tiller of the soil who alone would be clothed with the special rights of a hereditary tenant. [1065-D]

3. The terms of the Theka do not spell out the facts that the respondents had taken the lease for purposes of personal cultivation only, because other 1064

purposes also are indicated as part of the Theka namely to sublet the land or to appoint temporary tenants and the like. The conditions required by section 12 are therefore not fulfilled in the case of the respondents. [1066C]

Balu Noorul Hassan Khan (Dead) by LRs v. Ram Prasad Singh and others [1980] 1 S.C.C. 367 followed and relied upon; Rani Dullaiya & Anr. v. Ganga Prasad 1968 ALJ 518 over-ruled.

See the full content of this document

Extract

---

Raghunandan Singh & Ors. VS. Brij Mohan Singh & Ors.

PETITIONER: RAGHUNANDAN SINGH & ORS.

Vs.

RESPONDENT: BRIJ MOHAN SINGH & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT15/02/1980

BENCH: FAZALALI, SYED MURTAZA

BENCH: FAZALALI, SYED MURTAZA

KOSHAL, A.D.

CITATION: 1980 AIR 869 1980 SCR (2)1063 1980 SCC (3) 107

CITATOR INFO : F 1983 SC1139 (8)

ACT: U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (...

See the full content of this document

If you are already a vLex customer, access here

---