LAWS(PVC)-1925-3-209

(CHINTALAPATI BUTCHI) SEETAYYA GARU Vs. GOLLAVILLI APPADU

Decided On March 26, 1925
SEETAYYA GARU Appellant
V/S
GOLLAVILLI APPADU Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question to be decided in this appeal is whether the defendants gave permanent occupancy rights in the land in question.

(2.) The facts may be briefly stated, The Rajah of Vizanagaram granted in the year 1810 to Chintalapati Rayappa Razu a portion of the village of Lakkavaram on what was described as "Harasala Cowle" or permanent lease. The assessment and other dues payable to the zamindar were fixed at Rs. 1,421-6-0 and the grant contains the words that " the profits are to be enjoyed hereditarily from son to grandson." It may be useful to give the rendering of the grant itself (Ex. 1). Harasala Cowle granted by Sri Pusapati Narayanagajapathi Raju Maharajulungaru to Chintalapati Rayaparaju on Saturday, the 5 day of the bright-fortnight of Margasira of the Promodutha year. Yearly money rent for the village of Lakkavaram in the Purganah of Veddadi excluding the existing temple, Brahmin, mirasi inams from the year Pramothudha: Rs. 1,400 jamabandi or assessment Rupees one thousand four hundred and twenty-one and annas six is settled, and kadapa having been filed, Harasala Cowle is granted. Therefore, for this the instalments every year are ; In default of payment on due dates the amounts-should be paid along with interest. Cultivating this village extensively, the profits left after payment of the sircar jamabandi or assessment from, its produce, are to be enjoyed hereditarily from your son to grandson. The laws enacted by the company should be observed towards ryots and other peoples.

(3.) In 1823 there was what purported to be a relinquighment in favour of the zamindar and an endorsement was made on the Cowle to the effect that the land was relinquished. Taking his stand on~ this relinquishment, the zamindar sued, for possession in 1825. His suit was dismissed in 1827 by the Provincial Court, Northern Division, on the ground that the parties who made the relinquishment had no right to the land and that Simhadri Razu, the adopted son of Rayappa, Razu, was the person entitled.