9911796707
TMI Blog1968 (4) TMI 94X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the State of Gujarat and some of the claimants. The principal matters in controversy in these appeals relate to the award of compensation under the heads : (i) difference in Jama and full assessment, (ii) solatium of 15% on the market value, (iii) irrigational bunds, tanks and wells and (iv) river and river beds. 2. Excellent accounts of the history and incidents of the taluqdari tenures are given in Dr. Govind D. Patel's Agrarian Reforms in Bombay, 1950, Mr. J. B. Peile's Report, Government Selection No. CVI New Series, p. 13, Mr. L. Robertson's Report on the conditions of the taluqdars of the Ahmedabad district, 1903, statement of objects and reasons for Bill No. 6 of 1885 printed in Bombay Government Gazette, dated the 26th December, 1885, Part V, at p. 65 and Nawab Sardar Narharsinghji Ishvarsinghji v. The Secretary of State for India 43 Bom. L.R. 167. The origin of the Gujarat taluqdars may be traced to Moghul and pre-Moghul times. They are found mainly in the districts of Ahmedabad, Kaira, Broach and the Panchmahals. The leading characteristics of the taluqdari tenure is that the taluqdari estate is neither alienated nor unalienated but is proprietary. Unti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment of all the lands comprised within the estate. In practice the jama of the claimant's estates in Ahmedabad was limited to about 60% of the full assessment. As a measure of agrarian reform the Government decided to abolish the taluqdar tenures altogether. Accordingly the Bombay Taluqdari Tenure Abolition Act, 1949 was passed on January 24, 1950. It came into force on August 15, 1950. It extends to the districts of Ahmedabad, Kaira, Broach and Panchmahals. It repealed the Gujarat Taluqdar's Act of 1888 and certain other special Acts relating to taluqdars. Section 3 abolished the taluqdari tenure and extinguished all incidents of the tenure attached to any land comprised in a taluqdari Estate save as provided in the Act. Under sec. 4 all revenue surveys and settlements made under sec. 4 of the Gujarat Taluqdars Act, 1888 are deemed to have been made under Chapters VIII and VIIIA of the Land Revenue Code. By section 5(1)(a) all taluqdari lands are henceforth liable to the payment of land revenue in accordance with the provisions of the Land Revenue Code and the rules made thereunder. But this provision does not affect the right of any person to hold any taluqdari lan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ma while the settlements remained in force. The period of those settlements have now expired and they are now liable to pay full assessment. They have thus suffered a loss of 40% of the land revenue of the villages. They claim compensation for this loss under s. 14(1) of the Abolition Act which reads :- 14. (1). If any person is aggrieved by any of the provisions of this Act as extinguishing or modifying any of his rights in any land other than those in respect of which provision for the payment of compensation has been made under section 7 and if such person proves that such extinguishment or modification amounts to the transference to public ownership of such land any right in or over such land, such person may apply to the Collector for compensation within a period of twelve months from the date on which this Act comes into force. 5. Any person in sec. 14(1) includes a taluqdar. To get compensation under the section the claimant must establish firstly that his rights in any land other than those for which provision for compensation is made under s. 7 has been extinguished or modified and secondly that such extinguishment or modification amounts to the transference to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arising from the liability to pay full assessment. We have therefore to consider only the claim for compensation for the difference between the jama and the full assessment. 8. In Rao Bahadur Kunwar Lal Singh v. The Central Provinces and Berar [1944] F.C.R. 284 the appellant Rao Bahadur Kunwar Lal Singh held in Zamindari rights certain estates in the Central Provinces. The land revenue in respect of the estates was settled in 1921 under the Central Provinces Land Revenue Act, 1917 for a period of 19 years from July 1, 1919 and July 1, 1920 and thereafter until a fresh settlement was made. Section 88 of the Act provided that if the assessment of an estate, had been accepted under the Act, the proprietors would be bound to pay the land revenue assessed thereon from such date and for such term as the Provincial Government might appoint in that behalf and if at the expiry of such term no new assessment had been made, until a new assessment was made. The Central Provinces Revision of the Land Revenue of Estates Act, 1939 enacted that with effect from July 1, 1938 notwithstanding anything contained in the Act of 1917 the land revenue payable to the Government in respect of the estate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd within the meaning of sec. 14 of the Bombay Taluqdari Tenure Abolition Act. The Collector, the Revenue Tribunal and the High Court Therefore rightly rejected the claim of the taluqdars for compensation for the difference in the jama and the full assessment. 10. The next claim is for payment of a solatium of 15 per centum on the market value awarded under section 7 of the Abolition Act. The Collector and the Revenue Tribunal rejected this claim. The High Court partially allowed it and directed that an amount of 15% should be added to the market value awarded under section 7(1)(b)(iii). This ruling is challenged by both the State of Gujarat and the taluqdars. Section 7(1) reads :- 7. (1) Any taluqdar having any rights in such property shall be entitled to compensation in the manner provided in the stating the nature of his right, the ground of his claim and the amount of compensation claimed by him for the extinguishment of his right; (b) the Collector shall hold a formal inquiry in the manner provided in the Code and if the Collector is satisfied that the applicant had any rights in the land and that such rights have been extinguished under the last preceding sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue. This right is subject to the conditions and exceptions enumerated in sub-clauses (i), (ii) and (iii) of section 7(1)(b). In cases falling under clause (i) and in some cases under clause (ii) the amount of compensation is limited. In case falling under clause (iii) and in some cases under clause (ii) the amount of compensation is the market value which according to the explanation to sec. 7(1) means the value estimated in accordance with sections 23 and 24 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The value so determined includes the solatium of 15 per centum payable under sub-section (2) of s. 23. Where the legislature intended to exclude the application of sub-section (2) of sec. 23, it has said so, as in section 14(2) under which compensation is determined in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (1) of sections 23 and 24. It follows that the taluqdar is entitled to the solatium of 15 per centum of the market value, (1) under the main part of sec. 7(1)(b) subject to the provisions of the several sub-clauses thereof : (2) in cases falling under clause (iii) of section 7(1)(b) and (3) in cases under clause (ii) of section 7(1)(b) where market value is awarded. The direction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 13. The measure of compensation for lands or premises taken under the Lands Clauses Act, 1845 was their value to the owner. In special cases reinstatement value enabling the owner to replace the lands or premises taken from him was taken to be the correct measure of this value. This principle was later enacted in Rule 5 of section 2 of Acquisition of Land (assessment of compensation) Act, 1919 which is now replaced by Rule 5 of section 5 of the Land Compensation Act, 1961. In Raja Vyricherla Gajapatiraju v. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Vizagapatam 66 I.A. 104 Lord Romer said that the general principles for determining compensation under section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 did not differ in any material respect from those upon which compensation was awarded under Lands Clauses Act of 1845. In Harish Chandra Neogy v. Secretary of State for India 25 C.W.N. 875 and Province of West Bengal v. Raja Jhargram A.I.R. 1965 Cal. 392 it was suggested that in special cases the reinstatement value may be awarded as compensation under section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act. For the purpose of this case it is sufficient to say that this method should not be adopted where the market v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tum and non-irrigational bunds, tanks and wells. We are unable to accept this contention. Article 227 of the Constitution gives to High Court the power of superintendence over all courts and tribunals throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction. This jurisdiction cannot be limited or fettered by any Act of the State Legislature. The supervisory jurisdiction extends to keeping the subordinate tribunals within the limits of their authority and to seeing that they obey the law. It was the duty of the Revenue Tribunal to award compensation to the Taluqdars in accordance with the provisions of secs. 7 and 14 of the Act. The High Court had jurisdiction to revise the decision of the Tribunal where the Tribunal on a misreading of the provisions of secs. 7 and 14 declined to do what was by those provisions of law incumbent on it to do. Tested in this light it does not appear that the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction under Act. 227 in revising the decision of the Tribunal in respect of the solatium and irrigation bunds, tanks and wells. Numerous cases were pending before the Revenue Tribunal in respect of compensation payable to the taluqdars under the Bomba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
