AZMAT AZIM KHAN versus BOARD OF REVENUE, UTTAR PRADESH, ALLAHABAD & ORS.

Citation: [1971] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 440 · Decided: 21-04-1971 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: C.A. VAIDYIALINGAM · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

B 
c 
D 
E 
l1 
G 
H 
AZMAT AZIM KHAN 
'· 
BOARD OF REVENUE, UTTAR PRADESB, ALLAHABAD 
& ORS. 
A.pril 21, 1971 
(C. A VAIDIALINGAM AND A N. RAY, JI.) 
U.P. Encumbertd Estates Act, 1934-U.P. Abolition of Zamindari 
and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (Act I of 1951)--Compensation bonds pay-
able to intermediary whether can be withheld and payment on them wlrc!-
ther can be stopped in order to satisfy decree against intermediary under 
1934 Act--Effect of ss. 23A, 23B of 1934 Act and s. 70 of 1950 Act. 
There was a decree under the provisions of the U.P. Encumbered 
Eatates Ac~ 1934 against the appellant's father on the basis of a mortgage 
deed. The decree was transferred to the Deputy Commissioner for liquida-
tion of debts. Meanwhile the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms 
Act, 1951. came into force. 
Compensation for proprietary ri&hts as an 
intermediatery vested in the State_ Government became payable to the judg-
ment debtor. 
On the death of his father th .. appellant and his brother 
became entitled to his property as well as the compensation payable to 
him. The appellant and his brother received bonds of the aggregate value 
of Rs. 64,000. Bonds of the face value of Rs. 32,000 remained with the 
compensation officer. In 1959 tb:e decree-holder applied to the Collector 
for an order that the appellant and his brother do return the bonds which 
they had received from the compensation officer failing which their pro-
perties were to be attached. The matter went up to the Board of Revenue. 
Tho Board asked the Collector to take one or the other of three steps, 
namely, (I) to stop payment of instalment money on tho bonds by the 
treasuries or (2) direct the compensation officer \o hand over bonds of 
the face value of Rs. 32,000 remaining with him for the liquidation of the 
debts or (3) to attach the movable properties of the appellant and hi• 
brother for the liquidation of debts. The appellant thereafter made an 
application to the High Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution for an 
order quashing the order and direction to the Board of ·Revenue. The 
Division Bench, in appeal against the order of the Si.ogle Judge, quashed 
the direction of the Board of Revenue according to which the properties 
of the appellant and his brother were to be attached. The High Court 
upheld the other two orders of the Board of Revenue in regard to stop-
page of payment of instalment money on the bonds by the treasuries and 
direction to the Compensation Officer to hand over the bonds of the face 
value of Rs. 32,000 remaining with him for liquidation of the debts. 
In 
appeal to this Court the appellant contended that the Board Of Revenue 
did not have power to issue the said directions. 
HELD: By reason of the provisions contained in s. 70 of the U.P. 
Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 and s. 23A of the U.P. 
Encumbered Estates Act, 1934 the compensation money is sent for by 
the Collector for the purpose of liquidation of secured debts on which 
decree is passed. The Compensation Officer under r. 77(1) of the Zamindari 
Abolition and Land Reforms Rules, 1953 could issue notices to the inter-
mediary directing him to take the bonds becauSe under s. 18 of the 1934 
Act the decree holder becomes entitled to recover the amount of the liecree 
in the manner and to the extent mentioned in 1934 Act. The proviso 
lt.ZllAT ll:Hlt.N v. BOit.RD OF llVBNUB (/«ly, I.) 
441 
te s. 18 of the .1934 Act enacts that the secured debt shall bo recoverable 
A 
from tho compensation and rehabilitation grant as thou&h the security had 
.not been extin&uished. [445C-D] 
Furtll•r, s. 23A and s. 23B of the 1934-Act require that the amount 
from the bonds on account of compensation or rehabilitation grant received 
by Collector shall bo expended or utilised by the Collector in liquidation, 
of the amount of the secured debt. Under s. 23B of the 1934-Act the 
bonds are received by Collector in pursuance of tho requisition under s. 
B 
23A of the 1934 Act. The absence of the service of a requisition cannot 
confer a right on the judgment debtor to take away the compensation 
.money or bonds. The principle is actus curia neminem gravabit. [445E-F] 
Tho decree holder under the provisions of the relevant statutes was 
~nfitled to bo paid out of the compensatio·n grant monies in satisfaction 
of tho decree. If the Collector had required the Compensation Officer under 
C 
•· 23A of the 1934 Act to place at his disposal pursuant to s. 70 of the 
1
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.