TMI Blog1968 (7) TMI 91X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... singh ji and in lieu thereof was granted certain lands in Kharedf. The lands in Kharedi are the subject-matter of dispute in this litigation. On February 17, 1948 the grant was recorded in the Hak Patrak of the Virpur State. On March 8, 1948 the administration of the Virpur State was assumed by the United State of Saurashtra. The grant to the appellant was questioned the Saurashtra Government. Thereafter at a conference called the Jamnagar Conference, it was arranged between Narendra singh ji and the Government of India that the lands in Kharedi should be regarded as lawfully granted to the appellant subject to the condition that the grantee would not evict the cultivators from the land. The arrangement was set out in a letter dated Novemb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notification dated July 20, 1954 the Saurashtra Government clarified the earlier notification stating that the appellant was a Girasdar subject to the provisions of Section 18 of the Act, i.e., the condition imposed by the government at the time of his recognition that he cannot evict the tenants. In the meantime the appellant had applied to the Mamlatdar, Kalawad, for an order of allotment of land for personal cultivation under Section 18 (19?) of the Act. The application was resisted by the tenants who are the respondents in this appeal. The tenants claimed that they had chav rights and that in any event the appellant was not entitled to eject them. The Mamlatdar allowed the application and allotted to the appellant lands out of the holdi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation. It held that the conditions incorporated in the letter of November 2, 1949 having been accepted by the appellant enured for the benefit of the tenants under Section 18 of the Act. It also held that the rights of the appellant as Girasdar were restricted by the notification under Section 2 (15) of the Act declaring him to be a Girasdar and the appellant was bound by those restrictions. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant under a certificate granted by the High Court. 3. It is not disputed that the Government of India had the power to impose upon the appellant the conditions incorporated in the letter dated November 2, 1949 and that the appellant is bound by them. The Government could refuse to recognise the grant ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rasdar, The Act overrides other laws. Save as otherwise provided in the Act, its provisions have effect, notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained, in any other law for the time being in force or any instrument having effect by virtue of any such law or any usage, agreement, settlement, grant, sanad or any decree or order of any court or other authority, (S. 3). Chapter III regulates the relationship of Girasdars with their tenants. Subject to certain exceptions any person who is lawfully cultivating any land belonging to a Girasdar is for the purposes of the Act deemed to be the tenant, (S. 6). Sections 6 to 17 confer on the tenants certain benefits, privileges and immunities in respect of rent, cess, rate, hak, tax, servic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t by the government to the Girasdar and is not limited to a grant by the Girasdar to the tenant. 6. The next question is whether the rights and privileges of the tenant arising out of the conditions incorporated in the letter dated November 2, 1949 are limited or abridged by an order for allotment of land to the appellant under Section 19 for personal cultivation. Chapter IV enables Girasdars to obtain allotment of land for personal cultivation. Any Girasdar may file an application for such allotment before the Mamlatdar under Section 19 within a certain time. On making the necessary enquiries the Mamlatdar may pass an order making an allotment of land to the Girasdar, Section 20 (2). After making the order the Mamlatdar has to issue an occ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntravention of the condition of his grant that he would not evict the tenants. In view of Section 18 nothing in Chapter IV enables him to obtain an order limiting or abridging the rights and privileges of the tenants arising under the condition. The Mamlatdar could not under Section 20 pass an order which would have the effect of limiting or abridging those rights and privileges. The appellant had no right to evict the tenants and the Mamlatdar could not pass an order which would enable the appellant to evict them. The application filed by the appellant under Section 19 was therefore incompetent. 8. The appellant as a Girasdar was subject to the provisions of Section 18. The declaration in the notification dated January 29, 1954 that he was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|