http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 9  

PETITIONER: SHRI U.R. MAVINKURVE

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: THAKOR MADHAVSINGHJI GAMBHIRSINGH AND OTHERS

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 24/02/1965

BENCH: RAMASWAMI, V. BENCH: RAMASWAMI, V. GAJENDRAGADKAR, P.B. (CJ) HIDAYATULLAH, M. DAYAL, RAGHUBAR

CITATION:  1965 AIR 1747            1965 SCR  (3) 177  CITATOR INFO :  D          1971 SC1645  (4)  E          1980 SC  59  (2,4,6,8,9)

ACT:     Bombay  Merged Territories and Areas (Jagirs  Abolition) Act.  1953, 88. 3, 5 and 9--Jagirdars becoming occupants  of Forest   Areas  under  the Bombay Land  Revenue  Code  after Abolition Act--Whether their rights included right to  trees under s. 40 of the Code.

HEADNOTE:     The first eleven respondents were Jagirdars in a  former state  which  was merged with the State of  Bombay  in  June 1948.  In  August 1953, these respondents  entered  into  an agreement with respondent No. 12, whereby, the latter  could cut and remove all species of trees from forest lands in  39 villages  over  which the first eleven  respondents  claimed full proprietary rights.     On  August, 1, 1954, the Bombay Merged  Territories  and Areas  (Jagirs Abolition) Act, 1953 came into force  whereby all  Jagirs in the merged territories in Bombay  State  were abolished.  Under  s.  5 of the Act,  the  Jagirdars  became ’occupants’  in the lands including forest areas which  were then in their possession.     On   July  6,  1956  the  State  Government   issued   a notification  under  s.  34(A) of  the  Indian  Forest  Act, declaring  all uncultivated lands in the 39 villages  to  be forests for the purposes of Ch. 5 of the Act. Thereafter, in March and July 1958, the Divisional Forest Officer wrote  to the respondents stating, inter alia, that all the rights  of the Jagirdars having been abolished, the reserved species of trees  on  the lands belonged to the  State  Government  and prohibiting  them from cutting and removing the  trees.  The respondents  thereupon  filed  a writ  petition,  seeking  a direction to the appellants  to cancel, and to restrain from enforcing  the  orders  contained  in  the  letters  of  the Divisional Forest Officer.     The  High  Court  allowed the petition,  mainly  on  the ground  that  as the Jagirdars became occupants  within  the meaning   of   the Bombay Land Revenue Code  of  the  forest

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 9  

lands  under s. 5(1)(b) of the Abolition Act, they, and  not the State Government, were entitled to the trees standing on them.  In  the appeal to the Supreme Court  it  was  further contended  on behalf of the respondents that as s. 9 of  the Act  vested some of the rights to trees in forest  areas  in the  State  Government, by implication,  all  the  remaining rights belonged to the Jagirdars.     HELD:  Under s. 5(1)(b) of the Abolition Act,  the  only rights conferred on the Jagirdars were the occupancy  rights of the Forest lands; under s. 40 of the Bombay Revenue  Code the rights of occupants did not include the right to cut and remove  trees  from the forest lands except in the  case  of villages  as which the  original survey and  settlement  has been  completed,  whereupon the Government’s rights  to  the trees, unless expressly or otherwise reserved, are deemed to have been conceded to the occupant. In the present case  the villages in question had admittedly not been surveyed and 178 settled and therefore the rights of the State Government  to the trees could not be deemed to have. been conceded to  the respondents as occupants. [184 E-185 E]  By s. 3 of the Abolition Act all Jagirs and all the  rights of a Jagirdar were extinguished unless there was any express provision  in the Act saving any right. It could not be said that  because  s.  9 of the Act reserved certain  rights  to trees  of  the  State  Government  and  by  implication  the Jagirdars  had  all the other rights, there was  an  express provision  saving  the rights of the  Jagirdars  within  the meaning of s. 3. [185 F-H]

JUDGMENT:   CIVIL  APPELLATE  JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No.  281   of 1962. Appeal  by special leave from the judgment and  order  dated January 14,  1959 of the Bombay High Court in Special  Civil Application No. 2145 of 1958. S.G. Patwardhan and R.H. Dhebar, for the appellants.   S.T.    Desai,   J.B.   Dadachanji,   O.C.   Mathur    and Ravinder Narain, for respondents no. 1, 2, 4, 6, 10 and 12. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by   Ramaswami, J. Respondents nos. 1 to I 1 were the Jagirdars of  Waghach  State in former Sankeda Mewar  in  Reva  Kantha Agency  which now forms part of the State of  Gujarat.  They claimed  that  they  were the full owners of  all  the  land including forest areas in the said State and exercised  full revenue power during their regime. There were 39 villages in Waghach State in all of which there were forests. Except for the lands which were   cultivated, all the lands in the said villages were forest lands. Respondents nos. 1 to l1 further claimed  that  they  had full proprietary  rights  over  the forest  lands  and  enjoyed the  produce  as   full   owners thereof.  By the agreement of merger dated June 1, 1948  the State  of Waghach was merged with the State of Bombay   with effect from June 10, 1948. On August 19, 1953, respondents 1 to  11  entered  into an agreement with  respondent  no.  12 whereby respondent no. 12 became entitled to cut and  remove all  species  of  trees  from the forest  lands  in  the  39 villages  for a period of ten years. On August 1, 1954,  the Bombay Merged Territories and Areas (Jagirs Abolition)  Act, 1953  (Act  XXXIX  of 1954) came into force.  This  Act  was passed  with the object of abolishing jagirs in  the  merged territories  and  merged areas in the State  of  Bombay  and providing for matters consequential and incidental  thereto.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 9  

The  jagirs  were  classified,  under  the  Act,  into   two categories,  namely,  (1) Proprietary jagirs and  (2)   Non- proprietary  jagirs.  It is the undisputed position  in  the present  case  that  the jagirs  fell  in  the  category  of proprietary  jagirs.  Under s. 5  of the   Jagirs  Abolition Act  the Jagirdars became occupants in the  lands  including forest  areas which were in their possession  before  coming into  force  of  the  Act.  On  July  6,  1956   the   State Government  issued  a  notification under s.  34(A)  of  the Indian  Forest Act. declaring all uncultivated lands in  the said 39 villages to be forests for 179 the  purposes  of Ch. 5 of the Act. On March  19,  1953  the Divisional Forest Officer wrote a letter to the  respondents wherein  he stated that all the rights of the jagirdars  had been  abolished  by the Jagirs Abolition Act  and  that  the reserved  species of trees standing on the lands belonged to the    State    Government.   He,   therefore,   asked   the respondents to refrain from cutting teak and Pancharao trees standing  in  the  forest  lands. On  July  11,   1958.  the Divisional  Forest  Officer  wrote  another  letter  to  the respondents in which he stated that the reserved species  of trees--teak,  blackwood and sandalwood--vested in the  State Government  and, therefore, prohibited the respondents  from cutting and removing the material from those trees. He  also warned  the  respondents that if they cut  and  removed  the material  of such trees they will be liable to  prosecution. On the same date he wrote another letter to the  respondents and informed them that the material obtained by cutting teak and  blackwood trees which was tying in the   forest  lands, had  been advertised for sale. The  respondents   thereafter filed  a Special Civil Application no. 2146  of 1958 in  the High  Court of Judicature at Bombay against  the  applicants for the grant of a writ in the nature of mandamus under Art. 226 of the Constitution directing them to cancel the  orders contained  in the fetters of the Divisional  Forest  Officer dated  March 19, 1958 and July 11, 1958 and to restrain  the appellants  from enforcing the said orders. The High  Court, by  its  judgment  dated  January  14,  1959,  allowed   the application  of  the respondents holding that  after  coming into  force  of the Jagirs Abolition Act the rights  of  the jagirdars   in   the  forest  lands  and  the   trees   were extinguished but at the same time jagirdars became occupants of  the  forest lands under s. 5(1)(b) of the said  Act  and they accordingly became entitled to  the  trees standing  on the  forest lands. The High Court  held that all  the  trees standing on the forest lands  belonged to the respondents  1 to  11 and the same did not belong to the  State  Government and  consequently the State Government was not  entitled  to sell   the   material  obtained  by  cutting   the    trees. Accordingly    the    High  Court   issued   an   injunction restraining  the appellants from preventing the  respondents from  cutting  any species of trees standing in  the  forest lands  in  the villages in question and  from  removing  and disposing  of  the produce thereof. The High  Court  further held that this order would be without prejudice to the right of  the  State Government, if they had any, to  reserve  any class  of  trees  under s. 40 of the Land  Revenue  Code  or under  any  other  law for the time being in  force,  or  to impose such restrictions as it may be lawful for them to do, under the provisions of the Indian Forest Act and the  Rules made thereunder.     The present appeal is brought by special leave on behalf of the State of Gujarat and the other appellants against the order  of  the  High Court of Judicature at  Bombay  in  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 9  

Special Civil Application no. 2146 of 1958. 180     The question presented for determination  in  this  case is whether the trees standing in the forest lands of the  39 villages in question belong to the jagirdars--respondents  1 to 11 or to the State Government and whether the respondents have  a  right  to cut and remove the  trees  including  the reserved  species  of trees from the forest lands  of  these villages.     Section 3 of the Bombay  Merged Territories  and   Areas (Jagirs Abolition) Act, 1953 (hereinafter to be called   the Jagirs Abolition Act) states:                   "3. Notwithstanding anything  contained in               any   usage, grant, sand, order, agreement  or               any law  for  the time being in force, on  and               from the appointed date,---               all  jagirs  shall  be  deemed  to  have  been               abolished;                     (ii)  save as expressly provided  by  or               under  the  provisions of this Act, the  right               of a jagirdar to recover rent or assessment of               land  or to levy or recover any kind  of  tax,               cess, fee, charge or any has, and the right of               reversion   lapse,  if  any,   vested  in    a               jagirdar,  and all other rights of a  jagirdar               or  of  any person legally subsisting  on  the               said   date,  in  respect  of  a  village   as               incidents  of  jagir shall be deemed  to  have               been extinguished."     Under  s.  4 all jagir villages are made liable  to  the payment of land revenue in accordance with the provisions of the  Code and the rules made thereunder, and the  provisions of the Code and the rules relating to unalienated lands  are made applicable to such villages. Section 5 (1) (b) provides as follows:               "5. (i) In a proprietary jagir village,--                      (b)  in  the case of land  other   than               Gharkhed    land.  which  is  in  the   actual               possession   of   the  jagirdar  or   in   the               possession  of person other than  a  permanent               holder holding through or from the  jagir dar,               such jagirdar.               shall  be  primarily  liable  to   the   State               Government for the payment of land revenue due               in respect of such land and shall be  entitled               to  all the rights and shall be liable to  all               the  obligations in   respect of such land  as               an  occupant under  the          Code  or  any               other   law   for   the    time   being     in               force:               181               Section 8 of the Jagirs Abolition Act states:               "8.  All  public roads. lanes and  paths.  the               bridges.  ditches.  dikes and  fences.  on  or               beside  the same. the bed  of the sea  and  of               harbouts. creeks below high water mark. and of               rivers. streams, nalas. lakes. wells and tanks               and  all  canals and water  courses.  and  all               standing   and  flowing  water.  all   unbuilt               village  site lands. all waste lands  and  all               uncultivated lands  (excluding lands used  for               building  or other non-agricultural  purposes)               which  are  situate within the limits  of  any               jagir village, shall. except in so far as  any               rights  of any person other than the  jagirdar

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 9  

             may  be  established in or over the  same  and               except as may otherwise be provided by any law               for the time being in force. vest in and shall               be  deemed to be. with all rights in  or  over               the   same   or   appertaining  thereto.   the               property  of  the  State  Government  and  all               rights  held  by a jagirdar in  such  property               shall be deemed to have been extinguished  and               it shall be lawful for the Collector.  subject               to the general or special orders of the  State               Government.  to  dispose them of as  he  deems               lit.  subject always to the rights of way  and               other  rights of the public or of  individuals               legaliy  subsisting.                Section 9 reads:               "9.  The  rights to trees  specially  reserved               under  the  Indian Forest Act.  1927.  or  any               other law for the time being in force.  except               those   the  ownership  of  which   has   been               transferred by the State Government under  any               contract.  grant or law for the time being  in               force. shall vest in the State Government  and               nothing  in this Act shall in any  way  affect               the right of the State Government to apply the               provisions of the Indian Forest Act. 1927.  as               in force in the pre-Reorganisation  State   of               Bombay. excluding the transferred  territories               to forests in a Jagir Village."               Section 10 provides as follows:                    "10. Nothing in this Act or any other law               for  the  time being in force. shall be deemed               to   affect   the  rights  of   any   jagirdar               subsisting  on the appointed date to mines  or               mineral  products in a jagir village   granted               or recognised under any contract. grant or law               for  the time being in force or by  custom  or               usage."      Section  11 provides for compensation to  Jagirdars  in the manner provided therein.      Section  2(2) of the Jagirs Abolition Act  states  that any word or expression which is defined in the Code and  not defined in the Act shall be deemed to have the meaning given to it in the Code. 182 Section  2(1)(ii)  of the Jagirs Abolition Act  defines  the ’Code’ to mean ’the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879’.     Section  3(16) of the Bombay Land Revenue  Code  defines "Occupant"  as a holder in actual possession of  unalienated land, other than a tenant: provided that where the holder in actual  possession  is a tenant, the  landlord  or  superior landlord,  as  the  case  may be,  shall  be  deemed  to  be occupant.   Section  3(17)  defines "Occupancy"  to  mean  a portion of land held by  an occupant. Under s. 3(19) of  the Code "Occupation" means possession. Section 40 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code provides as follows:                  "40. In villages, or portions of  villages,               of  which the original survey  settlement  has               been completed before the passing of this Act,               the  right of the Government to all  trees  in               unalienated land, except trees reserved by the               Government  or by any survey officer,  whether               by express order made at, or about the time of               such settlement, or under any rule, or general               order in force at the time of such settlement,               or by  notification made and published at,  or

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 9  

             at  any time after, such settlement, shall  be               deemed to have been  conceded to the occupant.               But in the case of settlement completed before               the  passing  of  Bombay Act 1  of  1865  this               provision shall not apply to teak,  black-wood               or   sandal-wood  trees.  The  right  of   the               Government  to such trees shall not be  deemed               to  have  been conceded, except by  clear  and               express words to that effect. "In  the ease of villages or portions of villages  of  which the original survey settlement shall be completed after  the passing  of  this Act, the right of the  Government  to  all trees in unalienated land shall be deemed to be conceded  to the  occupant  of  such land except in so far  as  any  such rights  may be reserved by the Government, or by any  survey officer on behalf of the Government, either expressly at  or about   the  time  of  such  settlement,  or  generally   by notification made and published at any time previous to  the completion of the survey settlement of the district in which such village or portion of a village is situate.     "When  permission  to  occupy land has  been,  or  shall hereafter  be  granted after the completion  of  the  survey settlement  of the village or portion of a village in  which such  land is  situate, the said permission shall be  deemed to include the concession of the right of the Government  to all  trees growing on that land which may not have been,  or which  shall  not hereafter be,  expressly reserved  at  the time  of  granting such  permission, or which may  not  have been reserved, under any of the foregoing provisions of this section,  at  or  about  the time  of  the  original  survey settlement of the said village or portion of a village.     "Explanation.--In the second paragraph of this  section, the  expression  "In  the case of villages  or  portions  of villages of which 183 the original survey settlement shall be completed after  the passing  of this Act" shall include cases where the work  of the  original  survey  settlement referred  to  therein  was undertaken  before the passing of this Act as well as  cases where  the  work  of an original survey  settlement  may  be undertaken at any time after the passing of this Act." Section 41 states:                  "41.  The  right  to  all  trees  specially               reserved  under  the  provision  of  the  last               preceding   section,    and  to   all   trees.               brushwood,  jungle, or other  natural  product               growing on land set apart for forest  reserves               under  section 32 of Bombay Act I of  1865  or               section  38   of this Act. and to  all  trees,               brushwood,  jungle or other  natural               product, wherever growing, except in so far as               the same may be the property of individuals or               of   aggregates  of  individuals  capable   of               holding   property,   vests  in    the   State               Government  and such trees, brushwood,  jungle               or other natural product shall be preserved or               disposed  of  in  such  manner  as  the  State               Government may from time to time direct."               Section 65 states:                   "65. An occupant of land assessed or  held               for the purpose of agriculture is entitled  by               himself,   his  servants, tenant,  agents,  or               other  legal representatives, to  erect  farm-               buildings,  construct wells of tanks, or  make               any other improvements thereon for the  better

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 9  

             cultivation   of   the  land,  or   its   more               convenient use for the purpose aforesaid.               But, if any occupant wishes to use his holding               or any part thereof for any other purpose  the               Collector’s  permission  shall  in  the  first               place be applied for by the occupant.               The Collector, on receipt of such application,                     (a)  shall  send  to  the  applicant   a               written  acknowledgment of its receipt, and                     (b) may, after due inquiry, either grant               or refuse permission applied for;                       When  any such land is thus  permitted               to  be  used  for  purpose  unconnected   with               agriculture it shall be lawful for  Collector,               subject  to  the general order  of  the  State               Government to require the payment of a fine in               addition  to any new assessment which  may  be               leviable under the provisions of section 48."               184               Section  68 states that the occupant’s  rights               are  conditional,  and  is  to  the  following               effect:                  "68. An occupant is entitled to the use and               occupation of his land for the period, if any,               to  which  his tenure is limited,  or  if  the               period  is unlimited, or a  survey  settlement               has  been extended to the land, in  perpetuity               conditionally  on the payment of  the  amounts               due  on  account of the land revenue  for  the               same, according to the provisions of this Act,               or of any rules made under this Act, or of any               other  law, for the time being  in force,  and               on  the  fulfilment  of  any  other  terms  or               conditions lawfully annexed to his tenure;     The  High Court expressed the view  that under s.  3  of the Jagirs Abolition Act the rights of the jagirdars in  the forest  lands  and  the  trees which  grew  upon  them  were extinguished.  The  High Court further held  that  with  the coming  into  force of the Jagirs Abolition   Act  jagirdars became  the  occupants in  the forest lands under s. 5(1)(b) of  that Act and the respondents 1 to 11 become.  therefore, entitled  to the trees standing on the forest lands. In  our opinion,  the view expressed by the High Court is  erroneous and must be reversed. It is manifest that under s. 3 of  the Jagirs  Abolition Act all jagirs were abolished and all  the rights of the jagirdars were extinguished, save those rights which are expressly provided by other provisions of the  Act itself. It is also manifest that under s. 5(1)(b) of the Act the only rights conferred on the jagirdars are the rights of occupancy of the forest lands. In our opinion, the rights of the  occupants  under the Bombay Land Revenue  Code  do  not include  the  right  to cut and remove the  trees  from  the forest lands. The reason is that the 36 villages in  dispute have  not  been  surveyed  or settled  and  until  there  is completion of the survey and settlement there is no question of  concession  on the part of the State Government  of  the right  to  the trees in favour of the occupants. Section  40 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code provides that in the case of villages  of which the original survey settlement  has  been completed  before the passing of the Act, the right  of  the Government  to all trees in unalienated land.  except  trees reserved by the Government or by any survey officer, whether by  express  order  made  at, or  about  the  time  of  such settlement, or under any rule, or general order in force  at the  time  of such settlement, or by notification  made  and

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 9  

published  at, or at any time after, such settlement,  shall be deemed to have been conceded to the occupant. The  second para of s.  40 deals with concession of Government rights to trees in case of  settlements completed after the passing of the Act. The second para states that in the case of villages or  portions  of  villages  of  which  the  original  survey settlement shall be completed after the passing of the  Act, the right of the Government to all trees in unalienated land shall 185     be  deemed to be conceded to the occupant of  such  land except  in so far as any such rights may be reserved by  the Government,  or  by  any survey officer  on  behalf  of  the Government,  either expressly at or about the time  of  such settlement, or generally by notification made and  published at  any  time  previous  to the  completion  of  the  survey settlement.  The  third paragraph of s. 40  relates  to  the concession  of  Government rights to trees in case  of  land taken up after completion of settlement. The section  states that  when permission to occupy land has been granted  after the completion of the survey settlement of the village,  the said permission shall be deemed to include the concession of the  right of the Government to all trees growing  ’on  that land  which may not have been, or which shall not  hereafter be,  expressly  reserved  at  the  time  of  granting   such permission.  In  ’the  present  case,  the  36  villages  in question  have admittedly not been surveyed and settled  and the  necessary conclusion to be drawn is that the rights  of the  State  Government     to trees cannot be deemed  to  be conceded  to  the occupants of the land. The  assumption  is implicit  in s. 40 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code that  all the  trees  standing  and  growing on  the  lands  with  the occupants  belong  to the State Government and  not  to  the occupants and until there is a survey and settlement of  the village the question of concession on the part of the  State Government  of rights to the trees does not arise. In  other words,  until  there is survey and settlement  of  the  land there  is  no implication in favour of respondents 1  to  11 that they had concession of the rights of the Government  to the trees standing on the forest lands.     On behalf of the respondents Mr. S.T. Desai referred  to s.  9 of the Jagirs Abolition Act and stressed the  argument that   the  right of trees mentioned in that  section  alone vested  in  the  State Government and  there  was  no  other reservation  in the Act or any other law, in favour  of  the State  Government. It was contended that by  implication  it must  be held that the jagirdars had rights to the trees  in the  forest areas apart from those mentioned in s. 9 of  the Act. We do not accept this argument as correct. Section 3 of the  Act  provides for abolition of jagirs  and  under  that section all jagirs shall be deemed to have been abolished on and  from  the appointed date i.e., August 1, 1954  and  all rights  of  a  Jagirdar, in respect of a  jagir  village  as incidents   of   jagir,  shall  be  deemed  to   have   been extinguished  by  virtue  of the  section  unless  there  is express  provision  in  the Act saving such  right.  In  our opinion, s. 9 of the jagirs Abolition Act is not an  express provision  saving the right of the jagirdars with regard  to the trees and the argument of Mr. Desai must be rejected  on this  point. Our view is supported by the language of s.  10 of the Jagirs Abolition Act which expressly saves the  right of  the  jagirdar to mines or mineral products  in  a  jagir village  subsisting  on  the  appointed  day.  There  is  no provision in the Jagirs Abolition Act corresponding to s. 10 with  regard  to  the saving of the right to  the  trees  in

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 9  

favour  of the jagirdars. We are accordingly of the  opinion that after coming into 186 force of the Jagirs Abolition Act respondents 1 to 11 became occupants in respect of the forest lands in the 36  villages and  the only rights which they have are those of  occupants under  the  provisions of the Bombay Land Revenue  Code  and such  rights do not include the right to cut and remove  the trees from the forest lands of the villages in question.     In  our opinion, the High Court was in error in  holding that  the  respondents were entitled to cut and  remove  all species  of  trees standing in the forest lands  of  the  36 villages in question. We accordingly allow this appeal,  set aside the order of the High Court dated January 14, 1959  in Special  Civil Application no. 2146 of 1958 and  order  that the  Special  Civil  Application should  be  dismissed.  The appellants  are entitled to costs both in this Court and  in the High Court. Appeal allowed. 187