BUDHA versus AMILAL

BUDHA versus AMILAL

A Zamindar or Biswedar is entitled to Khatedari rights under Section 29(1) of the Act only if he was in actual possession/occupation of Khudkasht land at the date of vesting; constructive possession through a mortgagee is insufficient. Since the appellant admitted in the plaint that the mortgagee was in possession...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Budha; Respondent: Amilal
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
21 December 1990
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From a High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Abolition of Biswedari/zamindari, Vesting of Land in State, Redemption of Mortgage, Khudkasht and Khatedari Rights
Property Law Land Tenancy Agricultural Land Reform Abolition of Biswedari/zamindari Vesting of Land in State Redemption of Mortgage Khudkasht and Khatedari Rights

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Budha

Appellant

Amilal

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From a High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant, a Biswedar/Zamindar, acquired Khatedari rights over the mortgaged lands after abolition of Biswedari and Zamindari under the Rajasthan Zamindari and Biswedari Abolition Act, 1959, despite the lands being in possession of the mortgagee at the date of vesting.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant had standing to seek redemption of the mortgages after abolition and vesting of rights in the State.

Ratio Decidendi

A Zamindar or Biswedar is entitled to Khatedari rights under Section 29(1) of the Act only if he was in actual possession/occupation of Khudkasht land at the date of vesting; constructive possession through a mortgagee is insufficient. Since the appellant admitted in the plaint that the mortgagee was in possession since before the vesting, he was not entitled to Khatedari rights or redemption.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Suit is dismissed.
  • Appellant is not entitled to claim Khatedari rights or seek redemption of mortgage for the lands in question.