RAM SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiffs are the sons of Shri Bahadur. They have filed the present suit for a declaration that details and order of Shri G.S.Dhaka, Additional District Judge, Delhi dated 16/5/1986 so far as it holds that bhoomidari rights granted to Shri Bahadur are incorrect and plaintiffs are not entitled to compensation, should be declared to be null and void. A consequential relief is prayed to pay to the plaintiffs the compensation of the land to the plaintiffs.

(2.) The facts alleged are that plaintiffs claimed they are the heirs of Shri Bahadur while defendants 4 to 8 are the heirs of Prem Chand. Earlier there was a joint khatta of 314 bighas 6 biswas which constituted 72 parts and out of this joint khatta Kale and Rugan had 21/72 shares while Shri Ram Chander had 17 parts, Shri Prem Raj had 17 parts and Shri Bahadur also had 17 parts. Prem Raj was adopted by Hira Singh. Prem Chand filed a civil suit and in appeal it was held that Prem Chand as not the adopted son of Shri Rugan. On basis of a will he was declared to be the successor of Shri Rugan. It was therefore held that sons of Shri Bahadur had been declared to be bhumidar and civil court has no Jurisdiction to annul bhumidari rights.

(3.) After conning into force of the Delhi Land Reforms Act there were two types of tenures, namely Bhumidars and Assamis. Shri Bahadur was accordingly declared a bhumidar of the land. Prem Chand challenged the bhumidari rights of Shri Bahadur before the Revenue Court but his objections and appeals were dismissed. A notification was issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. It was further followed by a notification. The land in question was acquired. Shri Bahadur, the predecessor in interest of the plaintiffs filed the claim. The Land Acquisition Collector gave a supplementary award and awarded a sum of Rs.1,48,140.06. Simultaneously he forwarded the same under Sections 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act to the Additional District Judge, Delhi. Before Land Acquisition Court (Additional District Judge, Delhi) Shri G.S.Dhaka was the presiding officer. The plaintiffs had filed their objections. Issues were framed and it was held that plaintiffs were not entitled to the compensation. They were not the bhumidars or in other words the bhumidar rights conferred on Shri Bahadur were wrong.