MADHO Vs. KAKA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against an order of the learned District Judge, Sirmur District, whereby he allowed an appeal against the order of the Compensation Officer. The land, measuring 99 Bighas and 8 Biswas comprised in Khasra Nos. 115, 120. 124, 129 and 141 situate in village Rampur Majri, Tehsil Paonta, District Sirmur, had vested in the State Government under section 27(1) of the Himachal Pradesh Abolition of Big Landed Estates and Land Reforms Act. 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). ,

(2.) The land was in possession of occupancy tenants-Babu, Madho, Baru; Mangta, Bagga, Pratapa, Behari and Banwari. Babu had one-third share- Madho and Baru sons of Sunder had one third share and Mangta, Bagga.. Pratapa, Behari and Banwari sons of Maiya had one third share. In the revenue records, the share of Babu was recorded as one-half. But it was conceded before the learned District Judge, and has not been disputed in the present appeal, that the share of Babu was one-third only and the share of the remaining two branches was one-third each.

(3.) On the vesting of the land in dispute in the State Government, the Compensation Officer issued notices to the interested parties to file their objections against the grant of proprietary rights in the land to the occupancy tenants. Babu had died during the pendency of the proceedirgs. His legal representatives were Kaka, Ram Sarup and Gita. Kaka, one of the leagal representatives of Babu and Behari son of Maiya appreaed before the Compensation Officer on 13th August, 1965 and made statements that the legal representatives of Babu were occupancy tenants to the extent of one-third share and the other two branches were occupancy tenants to the extent of two-third share. They further stated that proprietary rights may be granted accordingly. Behari son of Maiya had also stated that the one-third share of Kaka and others was mortgaged with remaining two branches of the occupancy tenants.