A R VENKATACHALA IYENGAR Vs. STATE OF MYSORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This full Bench ha,s been constituted to decide the following question: Whether under the provisions or by virtue of the provisions of the Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954, there is a legal or statutory duty on the part of the State Government to collect rents payable by the tenants to be continued under Section 9A of the Act between the date of vesting and the determination of claims under Section 9A of the Act?"

(2.) The reference arises out of Appeal No. 62 of 1973 which was preferred from a decree of the Civil Judge Shimoga. The appellants were the Inamdars of lands measuring about 345 acres comprised in the Inam villages of Kannur and Gowlampur situated in Anandapuram Hobli, Sagar Taluk, Shimoga District. The said. Inam was abolished and vested in the Government with effect from first February 1959 consequent on the issuance of a notification dated 13th January 1959 under Section 1(4) of the Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as "the, Act"). The lands were then in the occupation of tenants. The appellants and their tenants made claims for registration of occupancy rights before the Special Deputy Commissioner. Upon investigation, it was found that the tenants did not belong to any of the categories like Kadim tenants, permanent tenants or quasi-permanent tenants on whom occupancy rights as against Inamdars were expressly conferred by the Act. They were however, registered as ordinary tenants under Section 9A with inamdars registered as occupants under S.9 of the Act. But after the date of vesting till date of registration of occupancy rights the appllants did not and indeed could not collect rents from their tenants. The appellants complaining that they have lost rents payable by their tenants during that interregnum instituted O. S. No. 50 of 1969 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Shimoga claiming from the Government three years rent amounting to Rs.98,550/- payable by their tenants. The trial Judge dismissed the suit on the ground that the Government had no opbligation to collet rents from those tenants and pay in turn to the appellants. A Bench which heard the appeal against that decree, formulated the question and referred the same to a Full Bench for opinion and that is how the matter has come up before us.

(3.) In order to reflect the real controversy as between the parties, we modify the question to read as follows: "Whether under the provisions of the Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954, the State Government is under a tegal or statutory duty to collect rents payable by the tenants entitled to continue under Section 9A for the period between the date of vesting and the determination of claims under Sections 9 and 9A of the Act, and pay in turn to the occupants registered under Sec. 9?"