Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1966Guj149
Shelat, C.J.1. This is a petition for a writ of certiorari to quash and set aside the order of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal dated February 27, 1951 which held that the claim for compensation filed by the petitioner in respect of the extinguishment of a grant in his favour fell under Section 15 of the Bombay Merged Territories and Miscellaneous Alienations Abolition Act, 1955, (hereinafter referred to as the Miscellaneous Alienations Abolition Act) and for a mandamus directing the State of Gujarat to continue to pay to the petitioner and his descendants the sum of Rs. 12,522 annually, and, in the alternative, for a mandamus directing the State of Gujarat to pay to the petitioner as compensation the amount of Rs. 4,17,400, being the capitalised value of the said grant of Rs. 12,522 which came to be extinguished under Section 4 of the aforesaid Act.2. The petitioner is the descendant of one Mir Nazmuddinkhan who was the cousin of the Nawab of Surat and the Baxi of his forces in or about t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1974All61
Hari Swarup, J.1. These appeals have been tiled by the Municipal Board Ghaziabad, and by the State of U. P. against the judgment of a learned Single Judge allowing the writ petition tiled by respondent No, 1. By his judgment the learned Single Judge has held that the land in dispute had not vested in the State Government under the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act and that consequently the Slate Government could not have by a notification issued under Section 117-A of the Act vested it in the Municipal Board, Ghaziabad.2. It appears that some land including plot No. 582 of village Bhojna, Pergana Loni, Ghaziabad, district Meerut, was acquired for the North Western Railway. Some of the land acquired was found to be surplus to the requirements of the Railway and was sold by auction on March 15, 1943, through the Land Acquisition Officer, Ghaziabad. Sri Mukand Lal, father of Seth Jai Prakash who had riled the writ petition, purchased an area of 48.13 acres including plot No. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1955Bom28; (1954)56BOMLR1062; ILR1955Bom127
Chagla, C.J.1. These are several petitions challenging the constitutionality of the Bombay Personal inams Abolition Act, 1952, being Act 42 of 1953. The 30 petitioners are inamdars of various inams and the exemption from land revenue in their case is below Rs. 5,000. In petition No. 404 of 1954 the exemption from land revenue in his case exceeds Rs. 5,000. Then there is one inferior holder who holds from the inamdar; that is petition No. 399; and in seven petitions NOS. 632, 846, 847, 921, 023 and 933 the petitioners are alienees from Inamdars and they have purchased the right to receive land revenue from inferior holders. There is one petition No. 1166 where the inamdar is the inamdar of wanta lands.2. Turning first to the Act which is challenged, it applies to inamdars, inam villages and personal inams, and we have the definition of an 'inamdar' in Section 2(1)(c) which defines an inamdar as a holder of a personal inam and includes any person lawfully holding under or through him. In...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1999SC1371; JT1999(3)SC181; 1999(2)SCALE716; (1999)5SCC199; [1999]2SCR810
ORDERB.N. Kirpal, J.1. Punganur Estate in Chittoor District in Andhra Pradesh was an impartible estate of which Raja Veera Basava Chikkar Royal Varu was the last Zamindar. The question involved in these appeals by special leave relates to the alienations made by the said Raja of some of the properties which formed part of the said estate.2. It is an admitted case that the estate was governed by the provisions of the Impartible Act 1904. Under Section 4 of the said Act the Zamindar had no right to alienate impartible property beyond his life time. The estate was governed by the rule of primogeniture and an alienation under the 1904 Act could, inter alia, be done for the benefit of the family.3. In 1908 the Madras Estates Land Act was passed defining the substitution, rights and liabilities of land-holders of ryoti and made declarations of the existence of the occupancy rights of the ryoti. The lands were divided into two classes; [1] ryoti land and ; [2] private land. It is not necessar...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : [2001]252ITR88(Raj)
Rajesh Balia, J.1. This is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, at the instance of the assessee, Rao Narain Singh of Masuda, relating to the assessment year 1960-61. It arises out of Income-tax Appeal No. 786/JP of 1972-73 and Cross Objection No. 33/JP of 1972-73 for the assessment year 1960-61. Along with the statement of case, the following two questions of law have been referred to this court for its opinion arising out of the order of the Tribunal in the aforesaid appeal and cross-objection.'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the aforesaid estate was different in nature from the estates created by the Crown Grants Act 15 of 1895, and that, as such, the decision of the Privy Council in Rajendra v. Raghubans Kanwar AIR 1918 PC 25, would not apply to the facts of the present case ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in ho...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1966Guj200; (1965)GLR978
Shelat, C.J.1. This Special Civil Application and Special Civil Applications Nos. 696, 794, 861, 930, 931, 1017, 388 and 949 of 1968 and Nos. 168, 811, 812 and 65 of 1964 involve identical facts and common questions of law and can, therefore, be conveniently disposed of by a common judgment. Special Civil Applications Nos. 588 of 1963 and 168 of 1964 how ever raise an additional question which we pro pose to deal separately in this judgment. Thefacts in all these petitions being similar, it is not necessary to recite them from all the petitions, and it will be enough if we take the facts in Special Civil Application No. 572 of 19815 as typical for a proper appreciation of the questions raised before us.2. The petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 572 of 1963 was at all material times a barkhalidar, and as such his rights as those of a barkhalidar were accepted first by the former Junagadh State and thereafter by the ex-Saurashtra State, and cash annuity orders were issued in resp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC928; [1966]2SCR440
Shah, J. 1. On December 11, 1947, the appellant granted to the Shivrajpur Syndicate Ltd. rights for the mining manganese ore from lands in two villages Shivrajpur and Bhat. The following are the materials terms of the indenture of lease : '. . . in consideration of the rents and royalties, covenants and agreements by the and in these presents and in the Schedule hereunder written, reserved and contained and on the part of the Lessee to be paid, observed and performed, the Lessor hereby grants and demises unto the Lessee All Those the mines, beds, veins, and seams of Manganese Ore . . situate, lying and being and under the land. . . . . . to Hold the premises . . granted and demised unto the Lessee for the term of twelve years which shall be deemed to have commended from the first of December One thousand nine hundred and forty five . . . Yielding and paying therefore unto the Lessor the several rents and royalties mentioned in Part V of the Schedule at the respective times herein spe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1999(2)AWC1201
ORDERR.R.K. Trivedi, J.1. In this bunch of writ petitions, petitioners have questioned the legality of the recovery of the amount demandedfrom them as collection charges at the rate of 10% of the amount sought to be recovered from them as arrears of land revenue in connection with the unpaid price of sugarcane purchased by them. In all these writ petitions question of fact and taw are similar and they can be disposed of by a common judgment. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 29612 of 1992 shall be the leading case.2. Facts giving rise to the writ petition are that petitioner has a unit at Iqbalpur, district Hardwar which is engaged in the manufacture and sale of crystal sugar through vacuum pan process. For manufacture of sugar the essential raw-material is sugarcane which is purchased from cane-growers from the areas reserved for it under the U. P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1953, (hereinafter referred to as 'Act'). As the sugar is an essential commodity, the price...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1956SC346; 22(1956)CLT251(SC); [1956]1SCR72
Das, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment and decree passed on the 28th September, 1953, by a Bench of the Orissa High Court in an Original Suit which was filed on the 24th November, 1952, in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Cuttack and was on the 17th January, 1953, transferred to the High Court and marked as Original Suit No. 1 of 1953. The suit was filed by the plaintiff-appellant claiming as the Raja and owner of the Rajgee, known as the Kanika Raj, against the State of Orissa, praying for a declaration that the Orissa Estates Abolition Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Abolition Act') was, in its application to the Rajgee of Kanika, invalid, unconstitutional and ultra vires the State Legislature and for an injunction restraining the State of Orissa from taking any action under the said Act. The suit was instituted evidently under an apprehension that the State of Orissa might issue a notification under section 3(1) of the Abolition Act declaring that the Rajgee...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1991SC1676; JT1991(2)SC439; 1991(1)SCALE617; 1991Supp(1)SCC430; [1991]2SCR105
ORDERS. Ranganathan, J.1. These are connected batches of Civil Appeals and Special Leave Petitions. We grant special leave to appeal in all the petitions (condoning the delay in the filing of the unnumbered one referred to below) and proceed to dispose of all the appeals by this common judgment. The details of the appeals and petitions are, for sake of convenient reference, tabulated below: High CourtDate of judgmentCivil Appeal/ S.L.P. Nos.Name of Appellant1. Orissa17-4-1980C.A. 2053-2080/80Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd.7-3-1983C.A. 4353-4354/83Orissa Cement Ltd.22-12-1989S.L.P. 1479/90State of Orissa22-12-1989S.L.P./90Orient Paper &Industries; Ltd. & Anr.13-7-1990S. O. P. 11939/90- do-2. Bihar10-2-1986C.A. 592/86Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd.3. Madhya Pradesh28-3-1986C.A. 1641-1662/86State of M. P.2. We shall discuss later the manner in which these appeals and petitions have arisen. THE ISSUE3. The validity of the levy of a 'cess', based on the royalty derived from mining lands, by the State...
Tag this Judgment!