LexBEGUM SURIYA RASHID & ORS. versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c D [E F G BEGUM SURIYA RASIDD & ORS. v. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH August 28, 1968 [S. M. S!KRI, R. S. BACHAWAT AND K. S. HEGDB, JJ.] Jagir--"Naslan-bad-naslan·· and "batnan-bad-batnan", meaning of- Jqir and muafi, difference between. The ruler of Bhopal granted a jagir .,. also muafi lands to the plain- tift's father. The grants were expressed to be for "naslan-bad-nalllan" and "batnan-bad-batnan" (descendant after descendant and generation after generation). On death of the plaintiff's father, his heirs were allowed to conlinue in p0sses.sion of the muafi lands and jagir under the oxpr..S orders of the darbar except for a ohort period during which it was managed by the Ruler. A fresh grant was made in favour of the plaintiff for life. A!fter the merger of tho Bhopal State in the Indian territory, the resp0ndent-State passed an order 'resuming the muafi. land, and took posse•- sion. The plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of possession, which wao dismissed. In appeal the High Court upheld the dismissal. During the pendency of the appeal, the plaintiff died. In appeal by the plaintiff's heini. thfa Court. HELD : The muafi. grants were not hereditary or pe!rpetual and the appellants could not claim title as muafidars. The Arabic expressions "oaslao-bad.-naslan" and "batnan-bad-batnan" in a grant normally import a heritable estate. But the surrounding circumstances and the occasion of the grant may show an intention that the grant is for life only. The evidence on the record satisfactorily established that the expressions "naslan-bad-naslan" and "batnan-bad-batnan" in a grant of jagir by the Bhopal darbar were never supposed either by the grantor or g'rante.e to convey a hereditary estate. They were regarded as nothing more than a recognition that the claim of the heir to the renewal of .the sanad would bo favourably considered. There is a distinction between a muafi and jagir. 'Ihe former is a r¢mission of land revenue whereas the latter is an assignment of land revenue of the grantee. On the evidence it has been rightly held that in Bhopal State the expression "naslan-bad-naslan" and batnan-bad-batnan 1 ' in the muafi grant had the same meaning as .in a· jagir grant. Raja Bajrang Bahadur Singh v. Thakurain Bekhraj Kuer, [1953] S.C.R. 232, 240, 242, referred to. CM:L APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1166 of 1965 .. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and decree dated March 19, 1963 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in First Appeal No. 238 of 1959. H Sar;oo Prasad and G. S. Sanghi, for the appellants. • l. N. Shroff, for the respondent. L!Sup.C.1./69--9 • t • • 870 SUPREME COUR'f REPORTS [1969] J s.c.R. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Bachawal, J. General Obaidullah Khan was 1he second son of Nawab Sultan Jehan Begum, the Ruler of Bhopal. The Bhopal ruler granted a jagir as also muafi lands 10 Obaidullah Khan. The land known as kali parade in village Chhola was granted under the sanad muali dated April I 0, 1916 in ex- change for another land. The land known as Ban Ganga was granted under 'the sanad muafi dated November 23, 1919. The jagir and the muafi grants were expressed to be for "naslan-bad- naslan" and "batnan-bad-batnan" (descendant after descendant aind generation after generation). Obaidullah Khan died in 1924 leaving behind him his two sons Saiycd-ul-Zafar Khan and Rashid-uz-Zafar Khan. On his death a question arose whether his lands should be attached, but under the express orders of the Bhopal darbar his heirs were allowed to continue in posses- sion except for 3 years during which the muafi lands and the jagir were managed by the Surfe-Khas, the department manag- ing the personal property of the Ruler. Saiyed-ul-Zafar Khan died in 1945. An application for the grant of a fresh sanad was made as early as 1927 but no action was taken until 1946. Under orders of the Ruler a fresh sanad was issued on Febru- ary 23, 1949 granting a jagir 10 Rashid-uz-Zafar Khan for his lite time and simultaneously the grantee executed an agreement promising to abide by the tenns and conditions of the grant. No decision was taken by the Bhopal darbar for the issue of a fresh sanad to the heirs of Obaidullah Khan. The Bhopal State merged in India in 1949. On May 10, 1954 the Chief Com- missioner, Bhopal, passed an order resuming the muafi lands. A writ petition filed by Rashid-uz-Zafar Khan
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.