ABDUL RAZAK Vs. MOHAMMAD SHABIULLAH KAZI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two revisions have been filed against a single appellate order of the Additional Settlement Commissioner, Rajasthan, Jaipur whereby the concurrent orders of the lower courts were reversed and it was directed that the land in dispute be recorded in the parcha chakbandi of the Settlement as being the khatedari of the masjid under the management of Imam Kazi Shabibullah, opposite party.

(2.) WE have heard the counsel for the parties and have also examined the record of the case. It has been argued before us by the counsel for the applicants that since the land was held as a estate grant by the masjid and his clients have been admitted as tenants thereof they were entitled to khatedari parcha under sec. 8 of the Jaipur Tenancy Act. The counsel for the opposite party contends that no khatedari rights can accrue in a land held by a religious institution like a masjid or a temple. In this connection reliance is placed on sec. 8 (b) of the Jaipur State Grants Land Tenures Act. This sub-section lays down that khatedari rights shall not accrue in land held as tenant by an artificial person such as an institution, corporation,temple or a mosque, This clearly means that no khatedari rights shall accrue in favour of an artificial person like a temple or a mosque. In other words, it is just the revenue of what the learned counsel for the opposite party interprets into mean. 1953 R. D. 233 has no applicability to the present case, for it was decided therein that tenancy rights as will as ex-proprietary rights can accrue in favour of an idol under the U. P. Tenancy Act 1949, for the obvious reason that there is no prohibition in that act as is to be found specifically in sec. 8 of the Jaipur State Grants Land Tenures Act. The point which is involved for determination before us is as to whether khatedari fights in favour of tenants can accrue or not in the land granted by the State to a religious instruction. Clearly there can be no two opinions on the point and this question is bound to be answered in affirmative. As laid down in sec. 8 of the Jaipur State Grants Land Tenures Act the provisions of sec. 7 to 10 of the Jaipur Tenancy Act, 1945, have been made applicable to the admission of persons as, or to the accrual in land held by them of the right of tenants of the different classes mentioned in sec. 7 in areas to which the State Grants Land Tenures Act applies. The view taken by the learned Additional Settlement Commissioner is clearly untenable.