LexSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA versus LAXMAN CHIMAN NAIK & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c D F 299 STA TE OF MAHARASHTRA v. LAXMAN CHIMAN NAIK & ANR. August 2, 1973. [K. K. MATHEW AND M. H. BEG, JJ.I Bombay Bhil Naik lnam Abolition Act. 1955, s. 7(1)- Compensatioll for abolition of imuns-Wllen i11amidar is entitled. On the question whether the High Court was right in holding that the respon- dents, who were inamdars, were entitled to compensation on the abolition of the Bhil Naik Inams under the provisions of s. 7(1) of the Bombay Bhil Naik Inam Abolition Act, 1955, HELD : A grant of the profits of land as remuneration for an office i& .resum able hut a grant of land burdened with service cannot be resumed unless ther is a specific provision in the grant to that effect. [302 G] In the present case, since the grants were intended to be of the soil and not ru provide remuneration for any specific services and there was no specific pro- vision in the grant entitling the government to resume, their abolition has the effect of e'Xtinguishing or modifying rights in property and hence the decision of the High Court was right. [302 G-H] (a) The object of the grants, which date from pre-British period was not so 111uch to provide remuneration for services which were being rendered or which were to be rendered, as to induce the Bhils to give up their predatory anti-social activities by settling them on lands. The grants were continued _ on political considerations by the British Government. The grantees were to render services mentioned in clause (2) of the Sanad; but there was no provision for resumption even if no services were required or for failure to rendt!r them. The fact that express provision has been made for resumption only on the failure to observe the three conditions specified in clause (3) of the sanad would show that there was an in1p1ied prohibition for resumption in any other contingency. [302 E-F, H to JOJA] (b) Further, the grantees were expressly precluded from alienating the inan1s or any portion of their income by mortgage or otherwise, thus making a distinc- tion between the inam and the income. The definition of 'Bhil Naik Inam' makes it clear that the grants were of the villages or lands and not of the income or revenue. The conclusion that there was a transfer of land itself is stren~thened by the provision in the sanad that the Secretary of State had reserved to himself all the rights which he had to all the mines and minerals and all powets for working and, exploring them as he liked. [303 A~C] Lakhamgouda BasavOrabhu Sardesai v. Baswantrao .and Ofliers, A.LR. 1931 P.C. 157, applied. G First Appeal No. 326 of 1g53 of Bombay High Court, approved. H CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 1550- 1551 of 1967. Appeal by certificate from the judgment and order dated Febru- ary 5, 1965 of the Bombay High Court in S.C.A. Nos. 770 and 771 of 1963. M. N. Plzadke, anll S. P. Nayar, for the appellant. N. D. Klzarkhanis and A. G. Ratnaparkhi, for the respondent (in C.As. No. 1551 ). 300 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1974 J 1 s.c.R. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MATHEW, J. The respondents tiled two applications before the Additional Collector, Nasik, under s. 7 of the Bombay Bhil Naik Inam Abolition Act, 1955, (hereinafter called the Act) for compen- sation. On the basis of the applications, the Additional Collector, Nasik, passed two awards negativing the claims. The respondents filed two appeals against the awards, but they were confirmed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal. To quash these orders, the respon- dents filed applications under article 227 of the Constitution before the High Court of Bombay. The High Court quashed the orders and held that the respondents were entitled to compensation and remitted the cases to the Additional Collector, Nasik for determination of the quantum of compensation. payable to the respondents. These two appeals, by certificate, are directed against the common judgment of the High Court quashing the orders passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal. The question for consideration in these appeals in whether the High Court was right in holding that the respondents, who were inamdars, were entitled to compensation on the abolition of the Bhil Naik Inams under the provisions of s. 7 (I) of the Act. The object of the Act was to abolish the Bhil Naik Inams held for service useful to Government on political considerations. Section 4 states that all Bhil Naik Ina
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.