LAJJA RAM & ORS. versus RATI CHAND & ORS. ETC

Citation: [2023] 16 S.C.R. 1525 · Decided: 09-11-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: HRISHIKESH ROY, SANJAY KAROL · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2023] 16 S.C.R. 1525 : 2023 INSC 1091
CASE DETAILS
LAJJA RAM & ORS.
v.
RATI CHAND & ORS. ETC
(Civil Appeal Nos. 2835-2836/2011)
NOVEMBER 09, 2023
[HRISHIKESH ROY AND SANJAY KAROL, JJ.]
HEADNOTES
Issue for Consideration:  Nature and extent of a bhondedar’s right 
over a shamlatdeh property (land reserved & used for common purpose in 
villages) and whether the bhondedar can exercise ownership rights over 
the granted land.
Customary Practice – Bhondedar – Bhondedar’s right over a 
shamlatdeh land – Nature and extent – Punjab Village Common 
Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 – Punjab Mujara Act, 1887 – Punjab 
Occupancy Tenants (Vesting of Proprietary Rights) Act, 1953 – In an 
earlier proceeding for declaration and occupancy rights before Asst. 
Collector against the Gram Panchayat, Defendant No.1 was held 
entitled to hereditary rights in view of the longstanding service of his 
ancestors as mujara (tenants) relating to the suit land-shamlatdeh land – 
Defendant No.1 sold the shamlatdeh land to appellants-Defendant nos.2-
5 – Suit fi led by Respondents (inhabitants of the village & biswedars-
proprietors) for declaration, possession & injunction – Dismissed by 
Trial Court – First Appellate Court reversed the said order and decreed 
the Respondents’ suit, declaring the Defendant No.1 as only a bhondedar 
but not the owner of the shamlatdeh land and annulling the sale deeds 
executed in favour of the appellants – Order upheld by High Court:
Held: The term ‘bhondedar’ has no statutory or legislative defi nition 
– But over a period of time, the term is equated with limited grant of land 
for service to be rendered by the grantee – It is a customary practice in the 
Punjab region (present-day areas comprising largely in the states of Punjab 
& Haryana) – A bhondedar has only limited right and should he fail to carry 
1525
 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2023] 16 S.C.R.
1526
out his assigned duties, even this limited right becomes unavailable – The 
very nature of the tenure(s) does not bestow upon the holder, any right to 
alienate the granted land – All alienations made by the limited holder of 
property, would be manifestly void because a bhondedar does not possess 
title or ownership right of the property granted to him, as a bhonda – Dfdt. 
No.1 held conditional and limited possessory rights as a bhondedar, 
subject to services being rendered towards the village community – Such 
limited right remained unaff ected and unaltered as long as the bhondedar 
fulfi lled their service obligations toward the village – However, the Dfdt. 
No.1 not only ceased to render the required services but also relocated to a 
diff erent place soon after unauthorisedly selling the suit land to appellants – 
Consequently, the bhondedar can have no legitimate claim whatsoever, over 
the suit land – When the services were ceased to be rendered towards the 
management, maintenance and upkeep of the shamlatdeh land, the limited 
grant so made to the bhondedar, by the proprietors-biswedars, in lieu of 
such services, extinguished – High Court also found that the decision in the 
previous proceeding cannot extinguish the rights of the plaintiff s and the 
Gram Panchayat in the suit because the biswedars were unaware of the Asst. 
Collector’s order – As soon as they learnt of such decree in Dfdt. No.1’s 
favour against the Gram Panchayat, they fi led Suit– High Court rightly held 
that the suit was fi led within time – Bhondedar could not have transferred 
his limited possessory rights or alienated the said property to the Appellants 
who in turn, as transferees, could not have derived any legal right over the 
suit land either – High Court’s decision in favour of the plaintiff s and the 
Gram Panchayat consistent with the opinion of this Court. [Paras10, 14, 
17, 20, 23, 24]
Land Laws – Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 
1961 – Inter-play of claims over shamlatdeh category land vis-à-vis 
the bhondedar, the Gram Panchayat and the proprietors of such land:
Held: The ownership to such lands rested in proportion to other lands 
of the village – For instance, an individual owning some land in the village 
also possessed additional proprietary rights and interest over shamlatdeh 
lands – However, with the enactment of the 1961 Act, the nature of vesting of 
such lands with the village community was somewhat altered – While such 
1527
lands owned by the proprietors came to be vested in the Gram Panchayat, 
the s.4 of the 1961 Act noted certain important exc

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