Skip to content


Shivram Narsingrao Vs. Mahadev Narayan Kulkarni - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Case Number Second Appeal No. 586 of 1911
Judge
Reported in(1912)14BOMLR797; 17Ind.Cas.170
AppellantShivram Narsingrao
RespondentMahadev Narayan Kulkarni
Excerpt:
.....vatan-court-sale of vatan land in execution proceedings-levy of full assessment by collector on land-land does not cease to be vatan by levy of full assessment-suit by next holder-limitation.;in execution of a decree against the plaintiff's father, the land in dispute which was patilki vatan was sold at a court-sale to the defendant in 1872. the defendant took possession and paid full assessment which was given to the officiator as his remuneration for service. the plaintiff's father died in 1905 and the plaintiff brought the suit in 1909 to recover possession of the land from the defendant. the lower court held that the land had ceased to be vatan on account of the levy of full assessment and that the suit was barred by limitation- on second appeal:-;(1) that the land as vatan did..........court-sale. but the land as vatan did not lose its character merely because the collector altered the mode of remuneration.2. if then the land continued as vatan after the court-sale in favour of the defendant, he took merely the right, title and interest of his judgment-debtor and on the death of the latter in 1905 his right under the court-sale ceased. it was then that the plaintiff as the next holder of the vatan became entitled to the property and this suit brought within twelve years from 1905 is in time. that is in accordance with radhabai v. anantrao bhagvant deshpande ilr (1885) 9 bom. 198 and ramgauda bin hirgauda v. gopal sadashiv (1898) p.j. 30.3. decree reversed and claim awarded with costs throughout on respondent.
Judgment:

Chandavarkar, J.

1. The Courts below have held that the land in dispute ceased to be vatan after the Collector had levied the full amount of assessment on it and assigned that amount as remuneration for service. But there is no provision in the Vatan Act or any other law to support that view. It has been held by this Court that a vatan continues in that character even when the Gordon Settlement has been applied to it and service has ceased to be demanded as a consequence of that settlement: Appaji Bapuji v. Keshav Shamrav ILR (1890) 15 Bom. 13 and Bhau P. v. Ramchandrarao M. ILR (1895) 20 Bom. 423. In the present case it is conceded by the learned pleader for the respondent, and indeed the Courts below have found, that the land in dispute had been vatan before in 1872 it was sold by the Court to the defendant in execution of a decree against the person who was then the holder of the vatan. The Collector levied the full assessment and assigned it for remuneration for service because of the Court-sale. But the land as vatan did not lose its character merely because the Collector altered the mode of remuneration.

2. If then the land continued as vatan after the Court-sale in favour of the defendant, he took merely the right, title and interest of his judgment-debtor and on the death of the latter in 1905 his right under the Court-sale ceased. It was then that the plaintiff as the next holder of the vatan became entitled to the property and this suit brought within twelve years from 1905 is in time. That is in accordance with Radhabai v. Anantrao Bhagvant Deshpande ILR (1885) 9 Bom. 198 and Ramgauda bin Hirgauda v. Gopal Sadashiv (1898) P.J. 30.

3. Decree reversed and claim awarded with costs throughout on respondent.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //