NDLI: Salem Municipality Vs. P. Kumar & Ors.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Tamil Nadu Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act 1948
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Order
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Tamil Nadu Estates (abolition and Conversion Into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 (26 of 1948)
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Land Laws and Agricultural Tenancy:Tamil Nadu Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari)Act, 1948: ss. 3, 11, 14-A and 64 – Lands in which ryot is entitled toryotwari patta – On facts, various leases granted in favour ofpredecessor in title of plaintiff by the erstwhile Zamindar – Leasedeed area formed part of Tank Bund Side-Waste dry and Tank Bund-Upper dry – Lease granted from the month of November to Junenext year, to expire before the commencement of rains in July as theland used to be submerged – Plaintiff ’s case that his predecessor intitle, continued in possession of the land when the 1948 Act cameinto force – Pursuant thereto, entire village, which included theplaintiff ’s land taken over by the State Government – Applicationsfiled by predecessor in title as also original plaintiff for grant ofRyotwari Patta u/s. 11 – Rejection of, on the ground that land wasnot ryoti land – Meanwhile, the State Government handed overcertain land including the plaintiff ’s land, to the appellant forconstruction of new bus stand – Suits for declaration of title andpermanent injunction filed by the plaintiff in respect of their landagainst the State Government and the transport corporation as alsothe appellant – Suits decreed by the trial court, however set asideby the first appellate court – Second appeals, filed there againstallowed by the High Court restoring the order of the trial court –On appeal, held: It is apparent from the leases that area in the leasedeeds formed part of the tank – As per the definition of ryoti landin s. 3(16), the area was clearly not a ryoti land as such, thepredecessor in interest or plaintiff could not be said to be ‘ryot’holding ‘ryoti’ land – In the absence of grant of ryotwari patta andin view of the fact that land formed part of tank reserved for commonuse, no right accrued to the plaintiff to claim ryotwari patta as hispredecessor was not ‘ryot’ and the disputed land was not ‘ryotiLand’ – Furthermore, the vendor of the plaintiff did not hold land for 12 continuous years – Finding recorded by the High Court asto possession is clearly perverse – There is no evidence on recordin the form of revenue record that the plaintiff ’s vendor was inpossession on the date of abolition and thereafter plaintiff remainedin possession at any point of time – Thus, no right, title or interestaccrued to the vendor of the plaintiff or to the plaintiff to obtainany ryotwari patta or for obtaining decree in the suit – Furthermore,s. 64 whereby right of the owner, occupier not to be affected bytemporary dispossession/discontinuance of possession renders nohelp to plaintiff – Also only part of the land has been given to theMunicipality could not have been made the basis by the High Courtto derive a conclusion in favour of the plaintiff so as to buttress thetitle – Approach employed by the High Court is wholly impermissible,unsustainable, perverse and illegal – Thus, the judgment passed bythe High Court is set aside and that of the first appellate court isrestored – As there was multiplication of various proceedings, thecost of Rupees One Lakh imposed upon the plaintiff to be depositedwith the Welfare Fund of Supreme Court Advocate-on-RecordAssociation – Tamil Nadu Estates Land Act, 1908 – s. 3(15), (16) –Evidence Act, 1872 – s. 114 – Costs.
Judge	N/A
Neutral Citation	2018 INSC 1058
Petitioner	Salem Municipality
Respondent	P. Kumar & Ors.
SCR	[2018] 13 S.C.R. 1223
Judgement Date	2018-11-15
Case Number	9-11

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Salem Municipality Vs. P. Kumar & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Ambikapathi Ammal&anr. Vs. Sri Kandaswamy Koil By Its Executive Officer Thiruporur

Oduru Chenchulakshmamma and Anr. Vs. Duvvuru Subramanya Reddy

S. Thenappa Chettiar Etc. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

State of Madras Vs. P. Govindarajulu Naidu

Rajah Velugoti Kumara Krishna Yachendra Varu & Ors. Vs. Rajah Velugoti Sarvagna Kumara Krishna Yachendra Varu & Ors.

Sri-la-sri Sivaprakasa Pandara Sannadhi Avargal Vs. Smt. T. Parvathi Ammal and Ors.

Gaudi Ramamurthy & Ors. Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.

S. Vanathan Muthuraja Vs. Ramalingam Alias Krishnamurthy Gurukkal and Ors.

Pushpagiri Math Vs. Kopparaju Veerabhadra Rao

Salem Municipality Vs. P. Kumar & Ors.

Salem Municipality Vs. P. Kumar & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Ambikapathi Ammal&anr. Vs. Sri Kandaswamy Koil By Its Executive Officer Thiruporur

Oduru Chenchulakshmamma and Anr. Vs. Duvvuru Subramanya Reddy

S. Thenappa Chettiar Etc. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

State of Madras Vs. P. Govindarajulu Naidu

Rajah Velugoti Kumara Krishna Yachendra Varu & Ors. Vs. Rajah Velugoti Sarvagna Kumara Krishna Yachendra Varu & Ors.

Sri-la-sri Sivaprakasa Pandara Sannadhi Avargal Vs. Smt. T. Parvathi Ammal and Ors.

Gaudi Ramamurthy & Ors. Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.

S. Vanathan Muthuraja Vs. Ramalingam Alias Krishnamurthy Gurukkal and Ors.

Pushpagiri Math Vs. Kopparaju Veerabhadra Rao

Salem Municipality Vs. P. Kumar & Ors.