N.K. RAJENDRA MOHAN versus THIRVAMADI RUBBER CO. LTD. & ORS.

Citation: [2015] 10 S.C.R. 626 · Decided: 02-07-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.Y. EQBAL · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2015] 10 S.C.R. 626 
N.K. RAJENDRA MOHAN 
v. 
THIRVAMADI RUBBER CO. LTD. & ORS. 
(CivilAppeal No.5163 of2012) 
JULY02, 2015 
[M.Y. EQBALANDAMITAVA ROY, JJ.] 
Kera/a Land Reforms Act 1963 - ss. 2(44), 3(1)(vii), 
C 3(1)(viii), 13- Malabar Tenancy Act, 1929- s. 2- Transfer 
of Property Act, 1882 - s. 116 - Suit for eviction and damages 
- On facts, in 1918 the appellant leased out 963. 75 acres of 
land to original lessee for a period of 36 years on payment of 
annual rent- Finally, respondent-company inducted into the 
0 
said land - Suit for eviction and damages by appellant-
plaintiff and others against respondent no. 1 - Appellant's 
case that the suit land belongs to their tarwad and was a 
private forest; that neither the original lessee nor his 
successors derive fixity of tenure or right of ownership; and 
E that the lease lapsed with the efflux of time - Respondeht 
pleaded fixity of tenure under the 1929 Act and the 1963Act 
- Courts below held the respondent-company was entitled to 
fixity of tenure and dismissed the suit - Interference with -
Held: Not called for - At the time of execution of the lease 
F deed, neither a private forest nor a plantation as defined in s. 
2(44)12(47) of the Act 1963 existed on the demised /and-
There was no restriction or regulation on the nature of 
cultivation/plantation to be resorted to by lessee on the 
cultivable portion of the land leased out - Respondent-
G company continued as lessee by holding over after 1954 
and lease rent was paid till 1978 as admitted by the appellant 
-Act of 1963 come into force prior thereto - Neither s. 3(1 )(vii) 
nor 3(1)(viii) is applicable to the plantation involved, thus, 
respondent-company is entitled to fixity of tenure u/s. 13 
H thereof - s. 116 even if applicable, the lease originally 
626 
N.K. RAJENDRA MOHAN v. THIRVAMADI RUBBER CO. 
627 
LTD. 
entered into would not get transformed with time into one of A 
tenancy in respect of plantation as defined ins. 2 (44) of Act 
1963, in absence of any overt act of the parties, intending 
the same on agreed upon terms. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
B 
HELD: 1.1 The scheme of Kerala Land Reforms Act, 
1963 would demonstrate, the statutory endeavour has 
been to strike a fair and equitable balance of various 
interests to be impacted thereby so as to facilitate c 
smooth implementation thereof, without casting undue 
financial burden on the State. Conferment of fixity of 
tenure on the tenants as well as the limited right of 
resumption to the landlords are also the noticeable 
features of the enactment with the emphasis thattheright o 
of resumption would not be available against tenants, 
who were entitled to fixity of tenure immediately prior to 
21.1.1961 under the law then in force, unless such tenants 
had in their possession land in excess of the ceiling area. 
The statement of objects and reasons also refer to the E 
provisions pertaining to determination of fair rent at 
uniform rates and purchase of the rights of the 
landowners and intermediaries of a holding by the 
cultivating tenant. The Act 1963 did provide for imposition 
of a ceiling on holdings and constitution of Land Tribunal 
F 
and Land Board for the administration ofthe provisions, 
with the remedy of appeal/revision from the decisions 
of this fora. [Para 14] [642-F-H; 643-A-B] 
1.2 Section 13 of the enactment mandates that G 
notwithstanding anything contrary to the law, custom, 
usage or contract or any decree or order of Court, every 
tenant shall have fixity of tenure in respect of his holding 
and no land from the holding shall be resumed except 
as provided in Sections 14 to 22. Section 72 proclaims H 
628 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 10 S.C.R. 
A that on a date to be notified by the Government in the 
official gazette, all right, title and interest of the 
landowners and intermediaries in respect of holdings 
held by cultivating tenants (including holders of 
Kudiyiruppus and holders of Karaimas) entitled to fixity 
B ·of tenure under Section 13 and in respect of which 
certificates of purchase under sub-Section (2) Section 
59 have not been issued, shall, subject to the provisions 
of that Section, be vested in the Government free from 
all encumbrances created by the landowners and · 
C intermediaries and subsisting thereon on the said date. 
[Para 15.1] [645-8-D] 
1.3 The lease deed executed on 21.6.1918 between 
the Tarwad of the plaintiffs and CH would demonstrate 
D that at the time of exe

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