Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1960SC438; (1960)62BOMLR244; [1960]2SCR393
S.K. Das, J. 1. This is an appeal by special leave from a decision of the High Court of Bombay, dated January 31, 1955, by which it dismissed with costs a writ application (No. 1100 of 1954) made by the petitioners therein, who are now appellants before us. It raises for consideration and decision a land revenue problem of some complexity, which resulted from the enactment of the Bombay Taluqdari Tenure Abolition Act, 1949, (Bombay Act LXII of 1949), hereinafter referred to as the Abolition Act. The problem is if the appellants, holders of certain lands known as 'Lal-liti' lands, are liable to the State Government concerned for payment of land revenue under the provisions of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879 (Bombay Act V of 1879), hereinafter referred to as the Revenue Code, after the enforcement of the provisions of the Abolition Act. 2. The problem has to be considered in the light of certain incidents of taluqdari tenures in the Ahmedabad district of Gujrat, with special reference...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1981SC2016; (1982)1GLR42(SC); 1981(3)SCALE1555; (1981)4SCC383; [1982]1SCR882; 1981(13)LC826(SC)
R.B. Misra, J.1. The present appeal by special leave is directed against the Full Bench decision of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad dated 23rd of September, 1976. The sole question for consideration in this appeal is whether Civil Court has jurisdiction to entertain and decide the suit giving rise to the present appeal.2. There is an old institution known as Edroos Dargah of Hazrat Sayedina Mohomed Bin Abdulla El-Edroos at Surat. Village Orma is an inam village held by the said institution. The dispute in the present case relates to the property of the said village Orma comprising its soil, trees, lanes, roads together with cultivated lands of about 1093 acres with land revenue alienated Rs. 2,747.10.5. Pursuant to the Bombay Personal Inams Abolition Act, 1952 (Act 42 of 1953) hereinafter referred to as the 1952 Act', the State of Bombay and after the reorganisation of States, the State of Gujarat, declared that the said Act was applicable to village Orma from l st of August, 19...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1970SC1133; 1970(0)KLT181(SC); (1970)1SCC189; [1970]3SCR383
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petitions Nos. 135-137 of 1969. Petitions under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India for en- forcement of the fundamental rights. M. C. Setalvad, Joy Joseph, B. Datta, J. B. Dadachanji, O. C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain, for the petitioners. Sarjoo Prasad and M. R. K. Pillai, for respondent No. 1. 386 The Judgment of M. HIDAYATULLAH, C.J., C. A. VAIDIALINGAM and A. N. RAY, JJ. was delivered by HIDAYATULLAH, C.J. Dis- senting Opinion of J. M. SHELAT and A. N. GROVER, JJ. was delivered by SHELAT, J. Hidayatullah, C.J. These are three petitions by Twyford Tea Company and one of its directors under Art. 32 of the Constitution seeking appropriate writ, order or direction to declare the Kerala Plantation (Additional Tax) Act, 1960 (Act XVII of 1960) and the Kerala Plantation (Additional Tax) Amendment Act, 1967 (Act XIX of 1967) unconstitutional and void. In addition the petitioners ask that the notices annexures B, C and D demanding payment of the tax be also qua...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1955SC504; [1955]2SCR303
Venkatarama Ayyar, J.1. These are applications under Article 32 of the Constitution impugning the validity of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act No. VI of 1952, hereinafter referred to as the Act. The history of this legislation may be briefly stated. On 20-8-1949 the Government of India appointed a Committee presided over by Sri C. S. Venkatachar to examine and report on the jagirdari and land tenures in Rajputana and Madhya Bharat, the object avowedly being to effect land reforms so as to establish direct relationship between the State and the tillers of the soil and to eliminate all intermediaries between them. By its report dated 18-12-1949 the Committee recommended inter alia the resumption of jagirs and payment of rehabilitation grants in certain cases. (Vide report, page 62). The question of legislation on the subject was taken up by the Government of Rajasthan in 1951, and eventually a Bill called the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Bill was...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1986Bom373; 1987(3)BomCR119; 1986MhLJ582
Shah, J.1. In all these matters a common question of law as to the correct interpretation of sub-section (2) of section 4 of the Bombay City (Inami and Special Tenures) Abolition and Maharashtra Land Revenue Code (Amendment) Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act') arises for consideration. Before turning to the controversy raised in these matters the facts which in so far as they are material and are not disputed need to be stated.2. In Appeal No. 24 of 1980 appellants (original petitioners in Misc. petition No. 1566 0f 1975) are the Trustees of the Behramji nowroji gamadiaParsi Hunnar Shala Trust which is a public trust constituted by a Trust Deed dated 26th September, 1933, made by Bai Navajibai Nowroji Gamadia. The trust is duly registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1960. The objects of the trusts include (a) the foundation, maintained and support of a Technological school or schools and institutes, Hunnar Shala, workshops and industrial and vocational chasses ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1999(4)ALD61; 1999(4)ALT209
ORDERN.Y. Hanumanthappa, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned single Judge of this Court in WP No.16232 of 1992, dated 30-10-1998. The appellants herein are the respondents and the respondents herein are the petitioners in the writ petition.2. The rank of the parties is described herein as in the writ petition.3. A few facts which are necessary to dispose of this appeal are as follows :One G. Narayaiia Swamy was the owner of Ac.S.OO of land in S.No. 129/10 of Shaikpet village forming part of Banjara Hills of Hyderabad, who had purchased the same under a registered sale-deed dated 21-1-1966. The said Narayana Swamy was the husband of G. Padmavathi, Ihe 1st petitioner herein. Petitioners 2 and 4 are his sons and petitioners 3 and 5 are his daughters. After purchasing the said land, G. Naryana Swamy put up a compound wall around the whole extent of Ac.8.00. He also put up small tentaments and a watchman's quarter in the said land. It contains Municipa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1957Bom270; (1957)59BOMLR527
Tendolkak, J. 1. This is a petition which raises the question of the assessability to land revenue of certain lands which belonged to the petitioner who was an inamdar. Part of his inam lands consisted of survey No. 6 measuring 4 acres 8 gunthas in the village of Athwar, Taluka Choraisi. The village was included in the limits of Surat City, and in the City survey carried on in 1924-25 the said land came to bear City Survey No. 60 Ward No. 13 of the City of Surat. Inam of the said land was- recognised under the Bombay Summary, Settlement Act, 1863, and on the 21st of April. 1879 a Sanad was issued by the Secretary of State-in-Council under the signature of; the Col lector of Surat in which it is stated that the said land is the private property of the Inamdar. In the Register of Alienated Villages and Lands maintained under Section 53 of the Bombay Land Re-venue Code, the land has been described as permanent (enfranchised private property) subject to payment of Rs. 7/- as Salami and Bs....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [2006(107)FLR495]
Sabhajeet Yadav, J.1. By this petition, petitioner has challenged the award of the Labour Court, Allahabad dated 19.1.2004 published on 24.8.2004 contained in Annexure-1 of the writ petition inter alia on the grounds mentioned in the writ petition.2. The relevant facts having material bearing with the question in controversy involved in the case are that the petitioner is transport agency (not transporter) in which goods are booked and are sent through trucks hired from transporters to different cities within the country as well as it receive goods from different transporters of the country and deliver it. The agency does not have any trucks/vehicles of its own and has a small office and a godown at Transport Nagar, Allahabad. The nature of business is such that the petitioner does not require more than two permanent employees in its establishment. The business of the petitioner being totally uncertain and is dependent upon the arrival of the truck loaded with goods booked to the agenc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1956All564
Bhargava, J. 1. I have had the benefit of reading the judgment of my brother Mehrotra, J, and agree with him but I would like to add a few words on the merits of the case. 2. The facts brought out in this petition show that originally the Sanad granted in favour of B. Ausan Singh conferred on him the rights of a proprietor in the pergana and he became entitled to realise the revenue which was payable by the sub-proprietors instead of the Government. Subsequently, however, this grant was resumed and it was decided that his successor B. Shiv Narain Singh was to be considered as the Tehsildar of Pergana Syudpore Bheittree and was to be allowed to hold the office hereditary. B. Shiv Narain Singh and after him his son B. Har Narain Singh did not agree to work as Tehsildars and to bear all expenses of administration and loss in collection. Ultimately this dispute ended in the grant of a sum of Rs. 36,330/- as pension to B. Har Narain Singh and his heirs, the amount being calculated on the ba...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1995SC142; JT1994(4)SC473; 1994(3)SCALE389; 1995Supp(1)SCC596; [1994]Supp1SCR807
ORDERK. Ramaswamy, J. 1. These five appeals raise four-pronged attack on the Constitutionality of the Bombay Land Revenue Code and Land Tenure Abolition Laws (Gujarat Amendment) Act 8 of 1982 (for short 'the Amendment Act'). Though unsuccessful in the High Court of Gujarat in Special Civil Application Nos. 1118 of 1982 and batch by judgment of the Division Bench dated 7/8 September, 1983 and followed in Special Civil Application No. 763/82 dated September 16, 1988 the appellants had leave of this Court. A short shift of the antecedent history of land tenures in Saurashtra region of the State of Gujarat is necessary to focus the focal points posed for decision, by common judgment. The appellants are successors of Barkhalidars and Girasdars. The erstwhile Saurashtra State consisted of 220 princely states rules by sovereign Rulers in their own rights. The lands in these appeals form present parts of Surendra Nagar and Bhavnagar districts. In the State of Saurashtra, the Rulers entered int...
Tag this Judgment!