WAXPOL INDUSTRIES LTD. Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner -appellant, The Waxpol Industries Limited, a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at No. 9. Mittar House, 71, Ganesh Chandra Avenue, Calcutta and its Branch Office at 68. Kanke Road, Dist. Ranchi, has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the order dated 28.8.2000, passed in CWJC No. 2676/2000(R) by the learned Single Judge, submitting therein that a piece of land of Plot No. 95, Khata No. 64 of village Haratu, P.S. Namkum, Dist. Ranchi, measuring 3.78 acres was owned and occupied by the petitioner -appellant. The total area occupied by him comes to 10.49 acres where the appellant -petitioner is running a factory for manufacturing various products since 1960 after obtaining requisite permission from the Chief Inspector of Factories, Government of Bihar and other concerned authorities. The petitioner -appellant has stated that the land in question is recorded in the Revisional Record of rights under Sikmi Khata No. 12 in the name of Gopal Kumhar, son of Nathu Kumhar, as "Naukrana" land. After the death of Gopal Kumhar his two sons, Gandura Mahto and Chedia Mahto, inherited and possessed the said land. The petitioner -appellant has claimed that by custom and usage in the area Sikmi rights were and are heritable. The said Gopal Kumhar and his successor -in -interest became the settled raiyats with respect to the said plots. They sold the land to Parmanand Garg and Purnanand Garg by a registered Sale -Deed dated 11.4.61. Subsequently one Pandit Murulidhar Sharma claimed right, title and interest over the said plot of land. He claimed that he has purchased the said Plot No. 95 from the raiyats of Khata No. 64 several years back and he perfected his title through adverse possession. His title was confirmed by the Special Sub -Ordinate Judge, Ranchi in a decree dated 2.5.61 in Title Suit No. 43/61. The said P. Gargs purchased the said plot by registered Sale -deed dated 13.5.61 and subsequently sold 3 acres 28 decimals of land to Metal Packs Pvt. Limited by a sale -deed dated 30.9.61. The said company. Metal Packs. Pvt. Ltd., purchased the said land for establishment of factory. The appellant by separate sale -deed dated 30.9.61 purchased 50 decimals of land and amalgamated into his land. Subsequently in 1962 Metal Packs Pvt. Ltd. was amalgamated with the appellant and all the assets, liabilities, movable and immovable properties vested with the appellant and such amalgamation was confirmed by the Honble High Court at Calcutta by an order dated 6.9.62 in Company Petition No. 156/1962. The said lands of Plot No. 95 are non - agricultural land and the petitioner -appellant is running factory since 1961 -62, i.e., long prior to coming into force of Section 71A of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908, vide Regulation 1/1969. The land ceased to be raiyati land since then. While the appellant - petitioner was in possession of the land, the State of Bihar issued notification under Land Acquisition Act and certain land was acquired for M/s. Damodar Valley Refractories including the land. In this present appeal the award was also prepared and this petitioner -appellant was shown to be entitled to a sum of Rs. 33,959,50. However, the appellant - petitioner got the land deleted from the said land acquisition proceeding as such it can not be said that the appellant got the land by virtue of any illegal transfer as alleged by respondent No. 3. Ram Charan Pahan, son of recorded raiyat, Late Lattu Pahan.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner -appellant has submitted that the land was not a raiyati land. In 1962 the land was non -agricultural and the said land was acquired in a land acquisition proceeding by the State. However, the said plot was deleted from the proceeding as the petitioner -appellant had already purchased the said land from the Sikmidar in the year 1961. Thus he acquired indefeasible right, title and interest.

(3.) THE learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 3 has submitted that the petitioner -appellant has not proved the usage and custom prevalent in the area that a Sikmidar raiyat or a raiyat or under raiyat is heritable and transferable. Section 71 -A is specific which provides that: