Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 2315-16 of 1978
PETITIONER:
PRAHLAD K. MODI AND ORS. (DEAD) BY LRS.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF GUJARAT
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 18/10/1994
BENCH:
K. RAMASWAMY & S.C. SEN
JUDGMENT:
JUDGMENT
1994 SUPPL. (4) SCR 468
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
These appeals by special leave arise from the judgment of the High Court of
Gujarat in F.A. Nos. 351 & 355/1972. The lands bearing survey Nos. 6 & 9
admeasuring 1 acre 5 gunthas and 1 acre 10 gunthas respectively situated in
village Sahikpur Bogha, taluka city, Dist. Ahmedabad are the subject matter
in these appeals. The land is governed by the Bombay Personal Iriams
Abolition Act, 1952 which came into force w.e.f. June 20, 1953. By
operation of s.4 of the Act all personal inams shall be deemed to have been
extinguished. Section 7 provides that all public roads:.... waste land and
all uncultivated lands (excluding lands used for building or other non-
agricultural purposes) which are situated within the limits of any mam
village or inam land shall, except in so far as any rights of any person
other than inamdar may be established in or over the same and except as may
otherwise be provided by any law for the time being in force, vest in and
shall be deemed to be, with all rights in all over the same or appertaining
thereto, the property of the State Government and all rights held by an
inamdar in such property shall be deemed to have extinguished and it
shall be lawful for the Collector, subject to the general or special orders
of the State Government, to dispose them of as he deems fit, subject
always to the rights of a way and other rights of the public of individuals
legally subsisting.
Explanation - for the purpose of this section, land shall be deemed to be
uncultivated if it has not been cultivated for a continuous period of three
years immediately before the appointed date.
It is neatly contended by Shri P.H. Parekh, learned counsel for the
appellant after a thorough preparation that s,5 of the Act gives right to
the Inamdar of retaining the land subject to the payment of land revenue in
accordance with the provisions of the Code and the Rules made there-under.
The land is being used for building purposes and also non-agricultural
purposes. Since s.7 itself made an exception to the lands used for
building or non-agricultural purposes, it must be read in conjunction with
s.S and that, therefore, 2 acres 15 gunthas of land in Survey Nos. 6 and 9
shall be deemed to be the land which had not been vested in the State by
operation of ss.4 and 7 of the Act, The High Court was, therefore,
not right in its conclusion that the aforesaid 2 acres 15 gunthas stood
vested in the State by proper reading of the provisions of the Act. We find
no force in the contention.
It is seen that s.4 makes clear that notwithstanding anything con-tained in
any usage, settlement, grant, sanad or order or a decree or order of a
Court or any law for the time being in force, with effect from and on
the appointed date, all personal inams shall be deemed to have been
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
extinguished. As its part, and composite scheme of the Act, s.7 expressly
enumerates the properties and appurtenant lands held by the inamdar shall
stand vested in the State. The pre-existing right, title and interest held
by the inamdar shall be deemed to have been extinguished and the property
shall belong to State though it was held by the Inamdar prior to the
appointed date. It shall be lawful to the Collector to take possession of
the land subject to the right of the third party enumerated in s.7.
Explanation makes clear the meaning of the uncultivated land stating that
if the land had not been used for a continuous period of three years
immediately before the appointed date, it is an uncultivated land. Past
tense "uncultivated" would clearly indicate that the land which is used for
agricultural purpose alone was saved and the Inamdar was allowed to retain
its pos-session. In all other lands, the pre-existing right, title and
interest of the Inamdar has been extinguished and vested in the State. The
lands used for building and non-agricultural purpose alone were saved from
tie operation of s.7. The explanation engrafted in s. 7..... that the lands
used for over three years prior to the appointed date for building or non-
agricultural purposes alone are saved from the operation of s.7. In other
words, the land must be actually used for building purposes or non-
agricultural pur-pose. That land alone stood excluded from vesting- All
other uncultivated land or waste land shall vest in the State and the pre-
existing right, title and interest of the Inamdar stood extinguished from
the appointed date. The possibility of its future use for building or non-
agricultural purpose is not a relevant consideration to exclude such land
from operation of s.7. The operation of s.7 is independent of and not
Subsidiary to s.5. nor an exception to s.5. Section 5 deals only with
cultivated land. Shri P.H. Parekh sought reliance on the judgment of the
Bombay High Court in Ambabhai Janhavibai v. State of Maharashtra, (1967)
BLR 291. In view of the above construction, the Bombay High Court was not
right in its conclusion that s.7 is to be read with s.5 and the lands which
are capable of being used in future should be uncultivated land to which
the Inamdar is endded to the possession is clearly illegal. In that view,
we find no ground warranting interference. The appeals are dismissed. No
costs.