STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. MAHARANI KAM SUNDARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal instituted on the strength of a certificate granted under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is preferred by the State of Himachal Pradesh against the decision dated August 20, 1970 rendered in M.S.A. No. 52 of 1968.

(2.) The appellant was the respondent and the respondent was the appellant in the second appeal. The second appeal was directed against the decision rendered on September 3, 1968 by the District Judge, Mahasu and Kinnaur Districts, in an appeal instituted under Section 104 read with Section 12 of the Himachal Pradesh Abolition of Big Landed Estates and Land Reforms Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The said appeal (C.M.A. No. 22 -M/14 of 1968), which was dismissed by the learned District Judge, was directed against an order of the Compensation Officer, Mahasu District, passed on December 28, 1967 in a proceeding under Section 11 of the Act (Case No. 68/66) refusing to grant proprietary rights to the respondent in respect of the suit land.

(3.) The respondent had preferred an application before the Compensation Officer under Section 11 of the Act on June 27, 1966 claiming to have become entitled to acquire, on payment of compensation, the right, title and interest of the appellant in the suit land comprising Khata/Khatauni No. 11/16, Khasra Nos. 10 to 19 totally admeasuring 32 bighas 7 biswas, situate in village Chharabra, Tehsil Kasumpti, District Mahasu. The claim advanced by the respondent was based on the plea that she held the suit land as a tenant under the appellant. Upon service of the notice of the proceeding, the appellant appeared before the Compensation Officer through the Sadar Kanungo of the office of the Collector, Mahasu District, who filed objections on behalf of the appellant. The Compensation Officer framed the following four issues ; "(1) Whether there is no relationship of landowner and tenant between the parties ? (2) Whether the land applied for does not fall within the definition of land because of existence of trees thereon ? (3) Whether the area of the land applied for under "ABADI" does not fall within the definition of land ? (4) Relief. -