ALAMELU AMMAL Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR SALEM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above appeal has been filed against the order of the Inam Abolition Tribunal (Principal Sub -Judge), Salem, dated 29.8.86 in I.A.T.A.No.17 of 1983 wherein the Tribunal below has chosen to reject the appeal on the ground that the appeal has not been filed within the period of limitation stipulated in Section 12(2) of the Tamil Nadu Inam Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1963 (Act 26 of 1963).

(2.) THE lands in question were held to form party of an existing inam estate as defined under Section 2(4) of the Act. The inam in question was notified and taken over by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.781, Revenue dated 12.3.65 with effect from 15.4.65. Since no one preferred claim for ryotwari patta in respect of the lands in question, suo motu enquiry was initiated and when notices were duly served on the interested persons and published in the village, one Sellayee Ammal said to be the mother of Sadayan alias Sella Gounder, claimed to be the husband of the appellant was examined as P.W.1 by the Settlement Tahsildar, Salem and she projected a claim for patta. It was noticed from the materials on record that the deceased Sadayan alias Sella Gounder purchased Survey No.83/2 from the inamdar under Document No. 1397/67 and one Nagammal has executed a settlement under Document No.2262/67 who in turn got it from the inamdar after 1.7.50 and this is a post 1.7.50 case. The lands were therefore treated provisionally as assessed waste wet, and a direction was issued that separate action will be taken in respect of the lands for the issue of ryotwari patta in the order of the Settlement Tahsildar, Salem dated 30.11.70. Aggrieved, the appellant herein who claimed to be the wife of Sadayan alias Sella Gounder filed an appeal before the Tribunal below and contended that she was in possession of the property as the wife of late Sadayan alias Sella Gounder and that Sellayee Ammal was not entitled to patta. Unfortunately as could be seen from the appeal filed in the court below, only the District Collector, Salem has been impleaded as party/respondent without formally impleading Sellayee Ammal who staked her claim before the Settlement Tahsildar, Salem. As noticed earlier, the appeal was filed before the Tribunal below in the year 1983 against the order of the Settlement Tahsildar, Salem dated 30.11.70. Adverting to Section 12(2) and Section 70 of the Act, the appeal came to be summarily dismissed on the ground that it was barred by limitation, since it was not filed within a period of three months from the date of order viz., 30.11.70. As against the said order, the present appeal has been filed.

(3.) THE order of the Tribunal is hereby set aside. The Tribunal (Subordinate Judge), Salem is directed to restore M.I.A.No.17 of 1983 to its file and dispose of the appeal in accordance with law. No Costs.