DARBAR SHRI VIRA VALA SURAG'VALA, VADIA versus THE STATE OF SAURASHTRA (NO-W BOMBAY)

Citation: [1960] 3 S.C.R. 521 · Decided: 14-04-1960 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SYED JAFFER IMAM · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

•• 
• ·1 
•• 
• 
3 S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
-521 
vVe have indicated above what 
is 
the crucial test 
in determining an association of persons within the 
meaning of s. 3, and we are of the view that the test 
suggested by lea1•ned counsel for the appellant are 
neither conclusive nor determinative of the question 
before us. 
Corning back to the facts found by the Tribunal, 
there is no finding that the three widows have corn_-
bined in a joint enterprise to produce income. The 
only finding is that they have not exercised their right 
to separate en joyrnent, and except for receiving the 
dividends and interest jointly, it has been found that 
they have clone no act which has helped to produce 
income 111 respect of the shares and deposits. 
On 
these fmdings it cannot be held that the three widows 
had the status of an association of persons within the 
meaning of s. 3 of the Indian Income Tax Act. 
The High Court correctly answered question No. 3 
in the negative. 
Accordingly, the appeals fail and are 
dismissed with costs. 
There will be one set of hearing 
fee in the two_ appeals. 
Appeals dismissed . 
DARBAR SHRI VIRA VALA SU RAG 'y ALA, 
1960 
Commission<r of 
Income-tax, 
Bomba;• 
v. 
Smt. Indira 
· Balkrishna 
S.K. Das J. 
I 
VADIA 
1960 
v. 
' 
THE STATE OF SAURASHTRA (NO-W BOMBAY) 
(jAFER IMAM, S. K. DAS, ]. L. KAPUR, 
A. K. SARKAR and M. HrnAYATULLA, JJ.) 
Grant by Ruler to younger son as Bhayat-Son becoming Ruler 
-Whether grant resumable-"Bhayat", Meaning of. 
In the Indian State of 
Vadia succession was 
governed by 
primogeniture. The Ruler in 1943 
granted to his younger son, 
the petitioner, a village in the State in perpetuity and in heredity 
for enjoyment as 'Kapal-Giras' as 'Bhayat'. ln -1947 the State 
of Vadia acceded to the Dominion of India and by subsequent 
constitutional deve!opments it became 
merged in the State of 
Saurashtra. After the coming into force of the Constitution the 
elder son of the Ruler and then the Ruler died, and the petitioner 
was recogni~ed as the Ruler. 
Thereupon· the State of Saurashtra 
issued a notification resuming the grant as it was deemed to have 
lapsed and revened to the 
former Vadia State. 
The petitioner 
contended 
that the grant 
was absolute 
and 
unconditional for 
April 14. 
1960 
Darbcr Shri Vira 
Vala Surag V alo, 
Varlia 
V. 
State of Saurashtra 
Kapur J. 
522 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1960J 
permanent 
enjoyment from 
generation to 
generation and 
the 
State could not resume it: 
Held, that the grant lapsed on the petitioner becoming the 
Ruler and the 
State could resume it. 
The grant was to the 
petitioner as a 
"Bhayat", \vhich word 
meant a cadet or the 
descendant of a younger branch of a Talukdar's family where the 
estate follo~·ed the rule of primogeniture; as such it ensured for 
his benefit as long as he remained a cadet. 
But when the grantee 
became the Ruler and ceased to be a "Bhayat", the grant came 
to an end. 
·ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Petition No. 62 of 1956. 
Petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India. 
for enforcement of Fundamental Rights. 
N. H. Ilingorani and A. N. Sinha, for the peti-
tioner. 
R. Ganapathy Iyer and T. M. Sen, for the res-
pondent. 
l 960. April 11. 
The .J u<lgrnent of the Court was 
delivered 
by 
KAPUR, .J.-Prior to 
the integration of the Indian 
States with the Union of I nclia on the promulgation of 
the Constitution of India there """ in Kathiawad a 
State of the name of Vadia, succession to the Rulership 
of which was by primogeiliture. 
Its Ruler then was 
Darbar Saheb Shri Snrag Vala Bavavala. 
He had two 
sons Kumar Shri 
Krishan Kumar and the petitioner 
Kumar Shri Vira Vala Surag Vala. 
Kumar Shri 
Krishan Kumar being the cider son was the heir-appa-
rent. 
On .July 5, l !143, the Ruler Darbar Saheb Shri 
Surag Vala executed two documents in favour of the 
petitioner granting him in perpetuity and in heredity 
a village called 'Mota Pithadia· in the State for enjoy-
ment 
as 
'Kap'11-Giras' 
as 
'Bhayat". 
The word 
'Bhavat' 
means 
a cadet or the descendant 
of a 
youn'ger branch of a Talukdar·s family where the State 
follows die r11le of primogPnilure. 'Kapal-Giras' means 
a grant in appanage as a birthright to a share in the 
patrimony. 
Sometime in or about August, 19'17, the State of Vadi;t 
acceded to the .Dominion of India on the terms con-
tained in an instrument of accession then executed. 
Thereafter, on .January ~'l, 19"}8, various States in the 
Kathiall'arl are

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.