http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 6  

PETITIONER: MAHARAJA KUMAR SOMENDRA CHAND NANDY

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

DATE OF JUDGMENT10/07/1985

BENCH: ERADI, V. BALAKRISHNA (J) BENCH: ERADI, V. BALAKRISHNA (J) MUKHARJI, SABYASACHI (J)

CITATION:  1985 AIR 1582            1985 SCR  Supl. (2) 115  1985 SCC  (4) 113        1985 SCALE  (2)293

ACT:      Uttar Pradesh  Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act 1950 ss.  4 & 6 - Jagirdari rights - Grant of - Whether fall outside the  purview  of  the  Act  -  Worship  of  deity  - Entrustment of  right -  Whether provision  for  payment  of compensation to be made.

HEADNOTE:      A Jagir  of 41  villages was conferred on Dewan Krishna Kant Nandy,  the predecessor-in-interest of the appellant by the Raja  of Banaras. By a fresh Sanad issued on January 10, 1785 the  Governor-General assigned  the  said  villages  as ’Altamga Jagir’,  for the purposes of defraying the expenses of worship  etc. of  the deity in a temple. Subsequently, in the year  1793, the grantee created a trust of the income of this Jagir in favour of the deity. In the revenue settlement of 1841  the  grantee  was  entered  as  Jagirdar  of  these villages entitled  to  realise  the  land  revenue  and  the zamindars were  to  pay  the  annual  land  revenue  to  the Jagirdar, and  since then  the grantee  and his  descendants have been  realising the  land revenue.  In execution of the decrees in the suits which were filed against the defaulting zamindars, the appellant’s ancestors purchased the zamindari rights.      When the U.P. Zamindari and Land Reforms Act, 1950 came into force  in 1952,  the  appellant  claimed  to  have  two distinct rights,  namely, Jagirdari  rights under  the Sanad and additional  Zamindari rights  acquired  by  purchase  in execution of  the decrees.  The appellant was, however, paid compensation in  the form  of annuity  in respect  of  those villages over  which he had acquired zamindari rights as the land was  held in  trust  for  meeting  the  expenses  of  a religious institution.  The State’s claim that the Jagirdari rights of the appellant became vested in the State under ss. 4 and 6 of the Act, was disputed by the appellant contending that his  Jagirdari rights  fell outside  the purview of the Act and had not vested in the State.      The appellant  filed a  writ petition in the High Court alleging that  he had  not been paid compensation in respect of Jagirdari  rights and  sought direction to the Government to 116

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 6  

recognize and  enforce the  Jagirdari rights  over the  said villages. The  petition was  dismissed and  this  order  was confirmed by a Division Bench.      Dismissing the Appeal to this Court, ^      HELD: 1.  The intention  of the  Legislature as clearly disclosed by  the Scheme  of  the  Uttar  Pradesh  Zamindari Abolition and  Land Reforms  Act,  1950  was  to  extinguish estates, all  derivative rights  in estates  and interest of intermediaries between the State and the tiller of the soil. All grants  and confirmation  of title in respect of a right or privilege  over land  in an  estate or its revenue, would stand automatically  determined under  the provisions of the Act. [118 G-H]      State of  Uttar Pradesh  v. Kunwar Sri Trivikram Narain Singh, [1962] 3 S.C.R. 213 followed.      2. In  the  instant  case,  the  appellant  was  having Jagirdari rights  over 41 villages under the Sanad issued in January 1785,  and the interest of the appellant in the land constituted an  estate under  Cl. (8)  s. 3  of the Act read with Cl.  (26) of  that section. As a result of the combined operation of ss. 4 and 6 of the Act, the Jagirdari rights on the date  of the  coming into force of the Act automatically ceased and became vested in the State free from encumbrances with effect from the specified date. [119 D-H, 120 A]      3. The  Sanad expressly  states that  the grantee shall take and  use the produce of the original lands and increase thereof without being liable to pay any Dewani contributions and government demands. [119 C]      4. The  appellant and his predecessors were entitled to take  possession  and  hold  control  over  the  lands.  The application for  grant of  the Sanad  clearly shows that the request was  for confirmation  of the  grant of 41 mouzas of land  and   for  the   issue  of  a  Sanad  evidencing  such confirmation. [119 D]      (Per Sabyasachi Mukharji J. concurring)      In the  instant case,  there is  no provision  for  any compensation for  vesting of  the right  of  entrustment  of certain duties  of worship  which belonged to the donee. The Act has  not been  challenged on  the ground  as being ultra vires  and  though  it  is  not  necessary  to  provide  for compensation in all cases after 117 the amendment  of the  Constitution, this  is a factor which normally should  be taken  into consideration because taking away of  a right  without some provision for compensation is normally  not  favoured  unless  one  is  compelled  by  the language of  the provision.  No provision  has been made for this obligation  of worship  i.e. whether the worship, would no longer  be continued  or whether the State would carry on the worship. In the social background this is a factor which normally deters one from interpreting a document in a manner which has abolished worship of the deity. [121 E-G]

JUDGMENT:      CIVIL APPELLATE  JURISDICTION :  Civil Appeal  No. 2239 (N) of 1970.      From the  Judgment and  Order dated  22.3.1966  of  the Allahabad High Court in Special Appeal No. 647 of 1961.      D.N. Mukharjee and Ranjan Mukharjee for the Appellant.      S.C. Manchanda and Mrs. S.Dixit for the Respondent.      The following Judgments were delivered :      BALAKRISHNA ERADI,  J. This  is an  appeal  by  special

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 6  

leave  against  a  judgment  of  a  Division  Bench  of  the Allahabad High  Court dated March 22, 966 dismissing Special Appeal No.  647 of  1961 and  confirming the  judgment of  a learned Single  Judge of the said High Court rejecting Civil Misc. Writ No. 809 of 1958 filed by the appellant herein.      The  appellant   claims  to   be  the   descendant  and successor-in-interest of  one Dewan  Krishna Kant  Nandy  in whose favour a jagir of 41 villages situated in the district of Ballia  had been conferred by Raja Mahip Narayan Singh of Banaras. This  jagir grant  was recognised by the East India Company and  in token  thereof the  Governor General,  by  a fresh Sanad  dated January  10, 1785  assigned the  said  41 villages as  ‘Altamga Jagir’ in favour of Dewan Krishna Kant Nandy. The Sanad mentioned that the grant was being made for purposes of  defraying the  expenses of  worship etc. of the deity in  a temple.  Subsequently, by a document of the year 1793, Dewan Krishna Kant Nandy created a trust of the income of this  jagir in  favour  of  the  deity.  In  the  revenue settlement of  1841, Dewan Krishna Kant Nandy was entered as Jagirdar of  these villages  entitled to  realise  the  land revenue and  the zamindars of the villages were charged with the duty of 118 paying the  annual land revenue aggregating to Rs. 10,000 to the Jagirdar.  It is  the case  of the  appellant that since 1785, Dewan  Krishna Kant  Nandy and  his  descendants  have throughout been  realising the  land  revenue  of  the  said villages. When some of the zamindars defaulted in payment of the land  revenue, suits  for realisation of the outstanding arrears were  filed against  them and  in execution  of  the decrees obtained  in those  suits the  appellant’s ancestors purchased the  zamindari rights  of the defaulting zamindars in respect  of some  of the villages. Thus, at the time when the Uttar  Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land reforms Act, 1950 (U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951) -  herinafter called ‘the Act’ - came into force in 1952, the appellant claims to have held two distinct  rights namely,  jagirdari rights in respect of 41 villages  covered by  the Sanad  and additional zamindari rights in  respect of  the some  of the villages acquired by purchase in execution of the decrees.      When the provisions of the Act were brought into force, the appellant  was paid  compensation in the form of annuity in respect  of those  villages over  which he  had  acquired zamindari rights  since the  lands were  held in  trust  for meeting the  expenses of  a religious institution. The State of Uttar  Pradesh claimed  that the  Jagirdari rights of the appellant became  vested in the State under sections 4 and 6 of the Act. But this claim was disputed by the appellant who contended that his Jagirdari rights fell outside the purview of the  Act and  had not  vested in  the State.  It was  for resolving the said dispute that the appellant approached the High Court  with the  Writ Petition  complaining that he had not been  paid compensation  in  respect  of  his  Jagirdari rights over  41 villages  and praying  that a writ should be issued compelling  the Government  to recognise  and enforce the  Jagirdari   rights  of  the  appellant  over  the  said villages. The  Writ Petition  was dismissed  by the  learned Single  Judge,   whose  judgment,  as  already  noticed  was confirmed by a Division Bench of the High Court on appeal.      From the  facts narrated  above, It  is clear  that the appellant was having Jagirdari rights over 41 villages under the Sanad  issued to him in January, 1785. As pointed out by this Court in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Kunwar Sri Trivikram Narain Singh  [1962] 3  S.C.R. 213,  the  intention  of  the legislature as  clearly disclosed  by the  Scheme of the Act

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 6  

was to  extinguish estates  and  all  derivative  rights  in estates and  to extinguish  the interest  of  intermediaries between the State and the tiller of the soil. All grants and confirmation of  title in  respect of  a right  or privilege over  land   in  an   estate  or  its  revenue,  will  stand automatically determined under the provisions of the Act. 119      The High  Court has rightly negatived the contention of the appellant  that the  right conferred on him by the Sanad was in  the nature  of a right to pension amounting to a sum of Rs.  10,000. We have gone through the terms of the Sanad, which is  available at page 13 of the paper book. It clearly shows that  what  was  granted  to  the  appellant  and  his predecessors was  a jagir  right in  respect  of  the  lands comprised in  41 villages  entitling the  grantee to collect and  realise   the  land  revenue  due  from  the  zamindars aggregating to Rs. 10,000 with possible future increases and utilise the  same for  ‘defraying the expense of the worship of the Thakoor’. The Sanad expressly states that the grantee shall take  and use  the produce  of the  original lands and increase thereof  without being  liable to  pay  any  Dewani contributions and  Government demands. The appellant and his predecessors were  entitled  to  take  possession  and  hold control  over   the  lands.  The  application  made  by  the appellant, his predecessor, Dewan Krishna Kant Nandy for the grant of  the Sanad  is at  page 15  of the paper book. That clearly shows  that the  request was for confirmation of the grant of  41 mouzas  of land  and for  the issue  of a Sanad evidencing such confirmation. Under the grant, the appellant and his  predecessors acquired interest in the land and this interest in  the hands  of the appellant clearly constitutes an Estate  as defined  in clause (8) of section 3 of the Act read along with clause (26) of the same section.      Section 4 of the Act provides that as from a date to be specified, all  estates situate  in Uttar Pradesh shall vest in the State free from all encumbrances. Section 6 lays down the consequences  of the  vesting of an estate in the State. Under clause  (a) thereof, all rights, title and interest of all the  intermediaries in  every estate automatically cease and become  vested in  the State  of Uttar Pradesh free from all encumbrances.  Clause (b)  of the  said  section,  which deals with  grants and  confirmations of  title  is  in  the following terms :-           "All grants  and confirmation  of title  of or  to           land in  any estate  so acquired,  or of or to any           right or  privilege in respect of such land or its           land revenue  shall, whether  liable to resumption           or not, determine". There cannot  be any  doubt that as a result of the combined operation of  sections 4  and 6  of the  Act, the  Jagirdari rights, which the appellant originally possessed over the 41 villages as  on the date of the coming into force of the Act automatically cease and 120 became vested  in the  State of  Uttar Pradesh free from all encumbrances with effect from the specified date. Such being the position,  the High Court was perfectly right in holding that the appellant was not entitled to any of the reliefs in the Writ Petition.      This appeal  accordingly fails  and is dismissed but in the circumstances without any order as to costs.      SABYASACHI MUKHARJI,  J. The facts of this case and the position in  law have  been discussed by my learned brother. The only  doubt that I have entertained about this matter is whether the  Sanad or  the grant dated 10th of January, 1785

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 6  

created any  in interest  in the  donee, Dewan Krishna Kanta Nandy, the  predecessor in interest of the present appellant as contemplated  under Section  3 and  Section 6 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (U.P. Act No. 1 of  1951). The document is at page 13 of the Paper Book in this Court and the material portion of which is as follows:-           "To the  present  and  future  Mutsuddies  of  the           affairs   of    Government   and   Zamindars   and           Chowdharies  and   Kanongoes  and   Mokudduns  and           Tenants  and  Cultivators  of  pergunnah  Gazipore           purchased by Government situate in Dooha Allahabad           be it  known that  Jageer Mouzas  to the amount of           Ten thousand  Rupees are  at present  settled upon           Dewan Krishna  Kant Nandy  by way  of  an  Altumga           Donation to  enable him  to defray  the expense of           the worship  of the  Thakoor from the commencement           of the  Autumn season in Aodiyal 1189 one thousand           one hundred and eighty nine Fasly according to the           Zamin so  that he  may take possession thereof and           hold control  over same and he and his descendents           apply the produce thereof and defray the necessary           expenses  of   the  worship  of  the  Thakoor.  It           behoveth that you consider that aforesaid Original           Mouzas and  increase thereof to be free and exempt           from being liable to charge and alteration as well           as  from   all  the   Dewanny  contributions   and           Government demands and not deviate from his advise           for the welfare of the tenants and inhabitants and           the cultivation  of the  land nor  require  a  new           Sanad every  year the conduct that the above named           is to  observe is  this that he shall take and use           the produce  of the  original lands  and  increase           thereof   he    and   his    descendants   without           participation or parter 121           and  pray   for  the  welfare  of  Government  and           continue the  tenants and  inhabitants pleased and           thankful by  adopting salutary  measures and exert           himself   strenuously    for   the   increase   of           cultivation  and   augmentation  of   duties   and           exercise no  apprehension or injustice towards the           inhabitants of  that place  by any  means and take           care of  the public roads that passengers may pass           and repass  in full  confidence and suffer no body           to commit  any prohibited  act or  drunkenness and           refrain  from  levying  any  of  the  Branches  of           Revenue that have been discontinued."      Is it  entrustment of  certain  duties  of  worship  of Thakoor and  for this  purpose providing  for some  expenses which will be met from the land indicated in the document or is it  a grant  of the interest in the land coupled with the obligation to  perform the  duty of  worship to  the  Deity? Having regard  to the  expressions used  in the  document to which my  learned brother  has referred and having regard to the  fact   that  incidental  powers  of  managing  etc.  as contained in  the said document as set out hereinbefore, the view taken  by my  learned brother  seems to  be appropriate though two  facts have caused me certain anxiety namely that there is  no provision  for any  compensation for vesting of this right  of property  which belonged  to the donee. I say this for  this reason  that though  the  Act  has  not  been challenged on this ground as being ultra vires and though it is not  necessary to  provide for  compensation in all cases after the  amendment of  the Constitution,  this is,  in  my opinion, a  factor  which  normally  should  be  taken  into

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 6  

consideration because  taking away  of  right  without  some provision for  compensation is  normally not favoured unless one is  so compelled  by the  language of the provision. The other factor which has caused me some hesitation is that for this obligation  of worship, no provision has been made i.e. whether the  worship would no longer be continued or whether the  State  would  carry  on  the  worship.  In  our  social background, this  is also a factor which normally deters one from interpreting a document in a manner which has abolished worship of  deity. But  in spite of these doubts, in view of the language  used in  the document  itself, I respectfully, though with  certain amount  of hesitation,  agree with  the view taken by my learned brother. A.P.J.                                     Appeal dismissed. 122