MAHARAJA OF JEYPORE Vs. RAJA LAKSHMINARASIMHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By a well-advised compromise made between the appellant, the Maharajah of Jeypore, a zemindar in the Madras Presidency, and the principal respondents, the Zemindar of Pachipenta and his two minor sons and ordered to be recorded by an Order of His Majesty in Council of 10th November 1932, the Maharajah has succeeded in perfecting his title to the greater part of the Pachipenta Zemindary, which his father had purchased at a Court sale held in execution of a mortgage decree obtained by the late Maharajah of Bobbili against the Zemindar of Pachipenta on 14th April 1903, in O. S. 1 of 1903 in the Court of the District Judge of Vizagapatam. Part only of the Panchipenta zemindary was within the jurisdiction of the District Court, the rest of the zemindary being situated in Hill or Agency Tracts of this District which, under a Governor-General's Act of 1839, were withdrawn from the jurisdiction of the civil Courts owing to their disturbed and backward condition and are still administered by the Collector as Governor's agent and his subordinates who discharge both judicial and executive duties. In the present case, the fact that part of the mortgaged property was situated within the jurisdiction of the District Judge was apparently deemed sufficient to give him jurisdiction as to the whole of the property in suit, and he made the usual decree for sale. After selling in execution of the decree four villages which were within his jurisdiction, the District Judge, purporting to act under the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, transferred the decree for further execution to the Court of the Agent of the Governor at Vizagapatam. The Agent's Court then proceeded to sell the rest of the zamindary, including certain villages which were within the jurisdiction of the District Judge. The Maharaja of Jeypore became the purchaser and the sale to him was confirmed as appears from the certificate of sale on 2nd May 1903. The purchaser's troubles then began. An objection that the villages did not include certain hamlets was decided in his favour on 21st March 1912, by the Madras High Court on a reference made to it under the Agency Rules.

(2.) The Maharaja then, on 21st August 1913, applied, under Madras Act 1 of 1876, to the Collector of Vizagapatam for registration in his name of the properties purchased by him in the register of the permanent settlement holders, and for apportionment of the peishcush, or permanently settled revenue due thereon. This order was necessary to make him the registered proprietor, and secure a reduction of the peishcush. On 10th May 1915, the Collector made the order as to 69 jeroyati villages or villages in the purchaser's possession, but held that as regards the mokhasa and agraharam villages he had only purchased a right to collect the kuttubadi or quit-rents issuing out of such villages and had not become their owner, so as to be entitled to separate registration under Act 1 of 1876. On 17th June 1915, the Collector refused to review this order, and referred the Maharajah to a separate suit.

(3.) As some of the villages in question were in the jurisdiction of the District Court and some in the jurisdiction of the Agent's Court, the Maharajah proceeded to file suits for separate registration in both Courts. In the Court of the Agent the Special Assistant Agent, Mr. A. C. Duff. I. C. S., held that by the purchase at the Court sale the auction purchaser had acquired the ownership of these villages and not merely the right to collect kuttubadi or quit rent, and ordered separate registration as to the villages in the Agency Tracts. In the suit in the civil Court, which is the subject of his appeal, the Subordinate Judge took the other view, and held that the auction purchaser had only acquired the right to collect the kuttubadi arising out of the villages, and was not entitled to separate registration under Madras Act 1 of 1876. He accordingly dismissed the suit.