PATEL BHUDER MAVJI ETC. versus JAT MAMDAJI KALAJI (DECEASED) THROUGH L. RS. JAT SAHEB KHAN MAMDAJI ETC.

Citation: [1969] 3 S.C.R. 690 · Decided: 13-02-1969 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M. HIDAYATULLAH · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

PATEL BHUDER MAVJl ETC. 
v. 
JAT MAMDAH KALAH (DECEASED) THROUGH L. Rs. 
JAT SAHEB KHAN MAMDAn ETC. 
February 13, 1969 
[M. HIDAYATULLAH, C.J. AND G. K. MITTER, JJ.] 
Saurashtra Agricultural Debtors Relief Act Mortgage with possessionr-
Morlgagor applying for adjustment..:_Land declared Khalsa under the Land 
Reforms Act-Effect of-Saurashtra Land Reforms Act, (Sau, 25 ol 
1951)-Land declared Khalsa-Rights of Mortgagor whether extinguished. 
The Respondent-Girasdars in the State of. Saurashtra mortgaged their 
lands with possession with the appellants, who paid the land revenue and 
other dues. 
By the Saurashtra Land Reforms Act (25 of 1951), the 
rights of the Girasdars were extinguished, and the tenants of Girasdara be-
came occupants di land held by them. The Land Reforms Act provided 
for the Mamlatdar to allot land to a Girasdar for personal cultivation .. The 
special Mamlatdar declared the lands in dispute to be Khalsa and full assess-
ment had to be taken, and that there was no need to grant any occupancy 
rights. The Saurashtra Agricultural Debtors Relief Act, 1954 was enacted 
scaling down the debts and for providing for restoration of their property 
to the debtors. Thereupon the respondents applied for adjustment of their 
debt to the Court having jurisdictioo under the Debtors Relie't Act. ~ 
appellants relied on the order of the Special Mamlatdar declaring the land• 
as Khalsa and contended that the lands having been declared as JChalro, 
the respondents had lost their rights therein. 
HELD : The rights· of the respoodents-Girasdars in this case were not 
extinguished under the Land Reforms .Act and it was open to the court 
exercising jurisdiction under the Debtors Relief Act to scale down the debt 
and provide the restoration of the land iit possession of the mortgagees to 
the mortgagors on taking fresh · account between the parties and directing 
payments by one party to the other. 
. 
The Saurashtra Land Reforms Act aimed at regulating the relationship 
O'f persons in pos.itioo of Landholders and their tenants, and to enable the 
tenants to become the real owners of the soil under direct tenancy from 
the State. It wa, not meant to extinguish or affect the rights of Land-
holders as mortgagors unless the persons in occupation had become tenants 
either by contract or by operation -0f law. 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
No adjudication Of the rights of the debton and creditors inter se was 
G 
done. 
All that the Special Mamlatdar decided and had iuriSdicti<>n to 
decide under the Land Reforms Act was whether the respondents could be 
given occupancy certificates or allotted any land Gharkhed and the Special 
Mamlatdar merely ordered that the lands being Khalsa full assessment had 
to be taken in respect of them and there was no need to grant occupancy 
rights. In order to get such occupancy rights the appellants bad ·to show 
that they had become tenants which they could not be 
under 
H 
the provisions of s. 6 of the Land Reforms Act. The fact that they 
had all along paid the revenue and other dues to the State, if any, would 
.not clothe them with tenancy rights. That apart, it has not been shown 
that the respondents were awarded any compensation ill respect of the 
A 
B 
MAVJI v. MAMDAJI (Mitter, /.) 
691 
Khalsa lands given in mortgage to the appellants. The occupancy certifl.. 
cates if any, given by the Special Mamlatdar to the appellants could nol 
unde; the provisions of the Land Reforms Act extingui•h the title of tho 
respondents. [695 H; 696 HJ 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeals Nos. 
123 
and 124 of 1966. 
Appeals by special leave from the judgments and orders dated 
April 28, 1965 of the Gujarat High Court in Civil Revision 
Applications Nos. 88 and 93 of 1961. 
P. B. Patwari, K. L. Hathi, S. K. Bagga and Sureshta Bagga, 
for the appellants. 
c 
P. M. Rawal and P. C. Bhartari, for the respondents. 
D 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
Mitter, J. These are two appeals by ,special leave from judg-
ments of the Gujarat High Court dated April 28, 1965 in Civil 
Revision Applications No. 88 and 93 of 1961. As the questions 
involved in both the applications were the same, the High Court 
delivered the main judgment in Civil Revision Application No. 
88/1961 and referred to the same in its judgment in Civil 
Revision Application No. 93 of 1961. The two applications in 
the High Court arose out of certain proceedings under the 
Saurashtra Agricultural Debtors 
Relief Aet. 
The 
app

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