SRI RAJAH JAGAVEERA RAMA MUTHUKUMARA VENKATASWARA ETTAPPA NAICKER AYYAN AVL., ZAMINDAR OF ETTAYAPURAM Vs. THE COLLECTOR OF TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY THE ESTATE MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Ettayapuram Zamin estate was notified under Act (XXVI of 1948) with effect from 3rd January, 1951. The Zamindar moved the High Court by a writ petition challenging the validity of the above Act. His petition failed. He carried the matter in appeal to the Supreme Court. There too he failed. The Government took over possession of the estate on 26th September, 1954.

(2.) THEREAFTER , the Zamindar filed a Petition under the above Act before the Assistant Settlement Officer claiming that at the time the Government notified and took over possession of the estate, they included certain villages which were not part of the Zamindari but were really inam villages. He accordingly moved the Assistant Settlement Officer seeking to have determined the nature of 88 villages which, according to him, were not part of the permanently settled estate of Ettayapuram but were really inam estates coming within the meaning of Section 2(7) of Act, XXVI of 1948.

(3.) WE shall in due course refer to specific terms of the grants. At present, it would suffice to mention that the 'gifts' were completed under formal documents, dated 22nd January, 1800 and 12th September, 1801. Subsequently, however, as part of the Permanent Settlement Proceedings started and completed under the Madras Permanent Settlement Regulation XXV of 1802, the estate of Ettayapuram was permanently settled. It is common ground that at that time no distinction was made between that part of the estate which had all along belonged to the Poligar of Ettayapuram and the other villages of Palayam of Panchalankurichi which were gifted to the holder of the estate of Ettayapuram. On the basis that these disputed villages formed part of separate grants the terms of which grants brought them within the scope of an inam grant, the petitioner moved the Assistant Settlement Officer for a declaration to the effect that this group of villages fell within the description of an inam estate. 87 of these villages are said to be covered by a grant, dated 12th September, 1801 and one village, viz., Sivagnanapuram, is covered by a grant, dated 22nd January, 1800. The Assistant Settlement Officer held both on a construction of the terms of the grants and subsequent events that the grants only purported to incorporate all of these villages in the Zamindari of the appellant, and even if the grants were construed independently, they were intended only to secure to the Zamindar rights similar in their nature to those which he held in relation to the Ettayapuram Zamin. He further held that by reason of the subsequent proceedings under Regulation XXV of 1802, whatever might have been the alleged origin of the Zamindar's rights to those villages, those rights ceased and the Zamindar could not claim to hold these villages except as part and parcel of a permanently settled estate.