TMI Blog1962 (4) TMI 97X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vacate tile land peacefully at- the end of the year of tenancy is kadapa is Ex. A- 1 dated April 4, 1951. Similarly,yearly kadavas were 'executed in earlier and 1948 were also produced in the case. The respondent, however, raised many pleas. He denied that the land was jeroyti land, alleged that it was part of a Dharmila inam land bearing R. S. No. 186/1-2, that the inam was granted to the appellant's predecessors more than 100 years ago, that the respondent's ancestors were ryots of that land from the very beginning, though muchalikas were taken from them every year and were executed by him and also his predecessors out of ignorance and under threats. The respondent claimed the kudiwaram rights for himself and averred that the appellant had only the melwaram rights which she lost, as they became vested in the Government after the Estates Abolition Act. He, therefore, contended that the appellant was now entitled only to a right to compensation, but had no right to the kudiwaram or the right to bring the present suit. The respondent also alleged that the appellant's husband who was a karnam had himself made entries in the Adangal accounts which he maintained, sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent had been prejudiced, because the decision was given without any plea or issue that this was a Karnikam service inam, which decision lay at the root of the decree. The learned Subordinate Judge in the appeal before him held that the absence of the issue regarding the Karnikam service inam had not prejudiced the respondent, who had himself set up a case of Dharmila inam and had also met the case of a Karnikam service inam and had filed documents and led evidence in refutation of the other case. He upheld the decision of the District Munsif that this was a Karnqkam service inam, and be confirmed the decree passed by him. On second appeal, the learned single Judge in the judgment under appeal held that the suit deserved to be dismissed on the short ground that the decision of the two Courts below proceeded on a matter not pleaded or raised as an issue. He, however, went on to consider whether the land in question was a Sarvadumbala Dharmila inam or a Karnikam service inam, and came to the conclusion that the two Courts below were wrong in holding that it was a Karnikam service inam. He, therefore, allowed the appeal, and ordered the dismissal of the suit. In this appeal with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase therefore, depends upon the documents produced by the two parties in proof of their own contentions. These documents stand divided two kinds : (a) those in which the inam is described as Dharmila inam and (b) those in which it is described as Karnikam service inam. Some of these documents do not appear to have been properly proved. There are, besides, many documents which were filed in the case but which are difficult to connect with the land in dispute. The last category will obviously have to be excluded from considera- tion. The most important document, of course, is the jeroyti patta (Ex. A-5) granted by the Zamindar of Pithapuram on September 1, 1925, because if the. land was held for Karnikam service from the Zamindar, then it is admitted that it could be validly resumed and re-granted by the Zamindar. The attempt of the respondent, therefore, which succeeded before the High Court but which had failed before the two Courts below was to show that the land was a Sarvadumbala inam, which could neither be resumed by the Zamindar of Pithapuram nor regranted by him. The learned single Judge in the High Court treated the finding, that prior to 1925 what existed was a Karnikam se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otwari) Act, both sides claim the benefit of s. 11 of that Act, the appellant claiming occupancy right on the strength of the patta read with the provisions of the Madras Estates Land Act as amended in 1936, and the respondent, on the strength of the averment that the appellant and her predecessors held an inam estate having only the meluwaram rights, which got extinguished. Whether the one or the other is right, therefore, depends upon whether the appellant held an inam or was merely a pattadar and thus an occupancy tenant now entitled to be a ryot, and the respondent was merely a sub-tenant. It is from this point of view that the evidence of documents in the case should be viewed. Before considering this evidence, it is necessary to refer to the provisions of the three statutes, which will clear the ground for our findings. The Madras Permanent Settlement Regulation of 1802 (Madras Regulation 25 of 1802) was passed to fix for ever a moderate assessment of public revenue not liable to be increased under any circumstance, to ensure to the proprietors of lands the proprietary right of the soil. Under that Settlement, instruments fixing the demand were to be delivered to the propr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... defined to mean in respect of any estate, an offence in such estate to which the Act or any portion thereof was extended and Village- officer meant a person holding or discharging the duties of such office Chapter III of the Act then provided for the imposition of a village service coos, its amount on apportionment and the method and incidents of its levy. This was to provide funds for payment of remuneration to the village servants who, prior to the Act, were often remunerated by grant of lands. Section 17 then provided : 17. If the remuneration of a village office consists in whole or in part of lands, or assignments of revenue payable in respect of lands, granted or continued in respect of or annexed to such village-office by the State, the State Government may enfranchise the said lands from the condition of service by the 'imposition of quit-rent under the rules for the time being in force in respect of the enfranchisement of village-service-inams in villages not permanently settled or under such rules as the State Government may lay down in this behalf, such enfranchisement shall take effect from such date as the State Government may notify: Provided that the sai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to lands granted by the proprietors to village artisans or village servants such as the astrologers and the purohits. Even in the Hereditary Village Offices Act, the term office is used not only in the title but in connection with artisans and village servants. The gist of s. 17 thus was that lands granted for the remuneration of the karnams were to be resumed by the State if granted by the State, and by the proprietor, if granted by the proprietor. The land in question in this case has not been shown to be granted at any time by the State. Resumption by the State under s. 17 was thus out of question. The only question is whether it was a Dharmila inam, i.e. a personal service inam granted after the settlement. or a grant for Karnikam service. That the land was held as Karnikam service inam on the date of resumption is amply proved by the proceedings. The question is whether it 'was a Karnikam service inam. On this point, the oral evidence has not been considered, and we have thus only the documents filed by parties. of these documents Exs. B-37 to B-43, which are the Dharmila inam accounts of Neduru village for fasli 1290 relating to Palivela Thana need not be considere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... greement is given. Continue as long as the service is rendered properly. (Signed)... .. for Raja. , and underneath, there is another endorsement : Immediate steps should be taken to resume his Inam and assess, as they are being paid money. This shows that by 1910-21 the change in law under which there was a money payment for Karnikam service was taken note of, and the lands were asked to be resumed by the Zamindar under s. I' of Act 11 of 1894. In Exhibits A-3 and A-4 (1923 and 1924), the Dewan again orders resumption of these lands, and in the latter, notice was ordered to be sent through a vakil. This notice was apparently issued in October, 1924, and the reply to it was given by Vakkalanka Venkatasubbarayudu in Ex. B-34, where he stated that the lands were not Dharmila Karnikam service inam. The admis- sion of Vekkalanka Venkatasubbarayuda is used by the respondent as an admission against himself; but it is quite clear that Vakkalanka Venkatasubbarayudu made that statement merely to avert resumption of the lands, which was quite contrary to the facts already stated by us. Indeed, the Pithapuram Estate did not pay attention to it, and took a statement from Venkatas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wn when the Inams were granted, by whom they were granted and for what purpose they were granted. No documents are available. This document does not throw any light upon the controversy, in view of the lack of material to connect it with the suit land. Exhibit B-2 is the Adangal Register of Fasli 1333, and the land is shown there as Dharmila inam. It is said that this Adanyal Register was written by the appellant's ancestor, who was the karnam. The fact that he was the karnam concedes a great deal of the appellant's case. The entry made by the then karnam in a register which might not have been accurately maintained, cannot lead to an inference that he made this entry against his own interest. In fact these people were claiming about that time that they bad a Dharmila inam, so that it would not be resumed, and it may be that the entry was made merely to support a case. Similarly, Ex. B-26 of 1920 is another account, and might have been written with the same object. The last document is Ex. B-28, which is a list of the dumbala inams in the Zamindari. There are no numbers of the lands, and there is thus nothing in it to connect the list with the land in suit. From the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
