STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS. versus K.V. KHADER

Citation: [1990] 1 S.C.R. 727 · Decided: 28-02-1990 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.H. KANIA · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

,. 
STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS. 
v. 
K.V. KHADER 
FEBRUARY 28, 1990 
[M.H. KANIA AND R.M. SAHA!, JJ.] 
Coorg Land Revenue Regulation, 1899-Regulations 29 and 30-
Records of Rights-Change-Permissible only by order/direction of 
Chief Commissioner. 
A 
B 
About 250 acres of wooded evergreen land was given to the c 
ancestors of Respondent by grant over a hundred years ago and a patta 
in respect thereof granting the aforesaid lands was given to them in 
1912 and in that patta there was an endorsement reading "redeemed 
coffee sagawali malai" indicating that the trees on the land had been 
paid for. In 1918, it appears that pursuant to an order passed by the 
Commissioner, the said entry had been altered to "unredeemed" show-
D 
Ing that the trees had not been paid for. The respondent applied for 
permission of appellant No. I to cut and remove some of the trees from 
the land granted to his ancestors. The said application was rejected on 
the ground that the seigniorage payable on the value of the timber 
standing on the land granted had not been paid and hence, before the 
trees could be cut and the timber removed, seigniorage in respect of the 
E 
trees had to be paid. The respondent thereupon filed a suit in the Court 
of Civil Judge, Madakeri for a declaration that the said land granted to 
him was redeemed in tenure and hence no payment of seigniorage could 
be demanded from him. The respondent claimed that the alteration of 
~he relevant entry from 'redeemed' to 'unredeemed' in the record of 
rights pertaining to the lands in qnestion was made under orders of the 
F 
Commissioner and not of the Chief Commissioner as required under the 
Regulation and hence the alteration was void having been directed to be 
made by an unauthorised person. The trial C_ourt decreed the suit and 
granted the declaration. The appellants preferred an appeal against the 
said decision to the District Court but the appeal failed. Appellant's 
further appeal to the High Court of Karnataka was also dismissed. 
G 
Hence this appeal by special leave. 
-
Dismissing the appeal, ·this Court, 
HELD: The suit in the instant case were not barred as they did not 
question the right of the Government to levy seigniorage nor the liabi-
H 
727 
728 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1990] I S.C.R. 
lily of the plaintiffs to pay but the plea was that seigniorage had already 
-1 
A ·been levied and paid. [73IEJ 
c 
D 
E 
Identical orders changing the word 'redeemed' to the word 'unre-
deemed' in the relevant entries have been uniformally made in a large 
number of cases which would suggest that these changes were made 
pnrsuant to a special revision of the record of rights in respect of a 
number of properties and was not an individual change in a particular 
entry in the record of rights of a particular plot ofland. [73IG-H] 
Under regulation 29 of the Coorg Regulation, this could have been 
done only pursuant to a direction or order of the Chief Commissioner, 
but no such order or direction of a notification to that effect appears to 
be on the record. The result is that the said change must be held to be 
unauthorised in law, void and of no legal effect. [732A-B) 
State of Mysore v. Kainthaje Thimmanna Enat and Ors., (1968) 2 
Mysore Law .Journal 227-referred to. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 2763 
of 1987. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 5.2.1987 of the Karnataka 
High Court in R.S.A. No. 17/1987. 
R.B. Datar and P.R. Ramasesh for the Appellant. 
Dr. Y.S. Chitale and E.M.S.Anam for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
KANIA, J. This is an appeal by special leave against the judg-
ment and order of a learned Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court 
in Regular Second Appeal No. 17 of 1987 filed in the said High Court. 
1
As we are generally in agreement with the reasoning and conclu-
0 sion in the judgment of the Karnataka High Court relied upon by the 
learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment, the appeal can be 
).
disposed of shortly. 
About 250 acres of wooded evergreen land in the district of 
Coorg was given by a grant to the ancestors of the respondent over a 
1-1 hundred years ago. The said district was a Scheduled district under the 
r 
-1 
\ 
r 
STATE OF KARNATAKA v. K.V. KHADER [KANIA, J.] 
729 
control of the Governor-General of India. The terms of the said grant 
which is very old are not available but there is no dispute that the said 
land was granted to the ancestors of the respondent. 
On Novem
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.