LAWS(MAD)-1956-2-34

T. GOVINDASWAMY NAIDU Vs. THE TANJORE PALACE DEVASTHANAM REPRESENTED BY ITS HEREDITARY TRUSTEE SRI R.Y. RAJARAM RAJA SAHIB

Decided On February 16, 1956
T. Govindaswamy Naidu Appellant
V/S
Tanjore Palace Devasthanam Represented By Its Hereditary Trustee Sri R.Y. Rajaram Raja Sahib Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by leave, from the judgment of Krishnaswami Nayudu, J., in S.A. No. 819 of 1945 and reported in Govindaswami Naidu v. T.P. Devasthanam, (1954) 2 M.L.J. 702, which raises the question as to whether the appellant has occupancy rights in the lands which are the subject -matter of the second appeal.

(2.) THE material facts have been sufficiently elaborately stated in the judgment under appeal and so do not require reiteration except for the purpose of appreciating the legal question discussed hereunder. Summary Suit No. 37 of 1942 was filed by the appellant under Section 35 of the Madras Estates Land Act for the grant of a patta against the respondent. The Tanjore Palace Devasthanam is represented by its hereditary trustee Sri Rajaram Rajah Saheb. The appellant who was a lessee from the respondent for a period of one year of the lands in question claimed that they have become an estate under the Madras Act XVIII of 1936 as a result of which he was entitled to the grant of a patta with the consequent exchange of muchilika, whereas the respondent's contention was that they are private -lands to which no occupancy rights could be attached. Though the trial Court decided in favour of the appellant the conclusion arrived in the Court of appeal was that the lands are private lands as defined in Section 3(10) of the Estates Land Act in which case no patta can be issued. Krishnaswami Nayudu, J., confirming the decision of the learned District Judge granted leave to appeal.

(3.) ACCORDING to the appellant the lands are ryoti lands since the village has become an estate by the Estate Land Act of 1936 and on that score he is entitled to the grant of patta. On the other hand, what is urged on behalf of the Devasthanam is that all along during the course of more than a century and a half the Devasthanam had been in possession of enjoyment of the lands in question as private lands.