Skip to content


Shaikh Omar Shaikhlal Vs. Mohammadji Madarji - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtMumbai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberSpecial Civil Application No. 1114 of 1964
Judge
Reported in(1965)67BOMLR815; 1966MhLJ55
AppellantShaikh Omar Shaikhlal
RespondentMohammadji Madarji
Excerpt:
.....the inam could not be said to have been held by or for the benefit of any charitable or religious institution within section 1(2) of the act.;that the service for rendering which the grant was made was a service to be rendered to a section of the muslim community and, therefore, the inam was a community service inam within the meaning of the act, and that such an inam was abolished with effect from july 1, 1960, under section 1(2a) of the act.;ram charan law v. fatima begum (1915) i.l.r. 42 cal. 933, at p. 935, distinguished. - - a church, school, college, hospital, asylum, reformatory, mission or the like......1959 (july 1, 1960) the act shall apply also to cash grants and inams of the nature of community service inams and watans. the expression 'community service inam' is defined in sub-section (1) of section 2 to mean an inam held for performing service useful to the village community and includes an inam held for such service even where such service has ceased to be demanded.3. the muntkhab which was issued about 1916 shows that the grant had been made to saroji kondaji and four other persons on condition of rendering service which is mentioned as taziadari. the holders of the inam were, therefore, five individuals, who cannot be described as a charitable and religious institution. the grant was not made to any society or organisation. according to the oxford english dictionary the word.....
Judgment:

H.K. Chainani, C.J.

1. The lands in dispute were granted as Inam on the condition of service which was specified as Taziadari, that is, for taking out Tazias during the period of Mohurram. After the coming into force of the Hyderabad Abolition of Inams and Cash Grants Act. as amended in 1959, the question arose whether this Inam was abolished by this Act. The Deputy Collector held that the Inam was not abolished. That order was confirmed in appeal by Government. It is being challenged before us in this application.

2. Sub-section (2) of Section 1 of the Act states that it shall be applicable to all inams except (i) inams held by or for the benefit of charitable and religious institutions and (ii) inams held for rendering village service useful to the Government or to the village community including sethsendhi, neeradi and balutha inams. Sub-section (2A) provides that on the coming into force of the Hyderabad Abolition of Inams (Amendment) Act, 1959 (July 1, 1960) the Act shall apply also to cash grants and inams of the nature of community service inams and watans. The expression 'community service inam' is defined in Sub-section (1) of Section 2 to mean an inam held for performing service useful to the village community and includes an inam held for such service even where such service has ceased to be demanded.

3. The Muntkhab which was issued about 1916 shows that the grant had been made to Saroji Kondaji and four other persons on condition of rendering service which is mentioned as Taziadari. The holders of the inam were, therefore, five individuals, who cannot be described as a charitable and religious institution. The grant was not made to any society or organisation. According to the Oxford English Dictionary the word 'institution' means

establishment; organization or association instituted for the promotion of some object specially, one of public or general utility, religious, charitable, educational etc. e.g. a church, school, college, hospital, asylum, reformatory, mission or the like.

This is the ordinary meaning of the word. Another meaning is

established law, custom, usage, practice, organization or other element in the political or social life of the people.

Colloquially it is some times used in the sense of something having fixity or importance of a social institution, e.g. in the sentence 'He is one of the institutions of the place.' Ordinarily, therefore, an individual is not referred to as an institution. A grant to an individual would not, therefore, be a grant to an institution. The fact that the grant was made for the performance of service of a religious or charitable nature is immaterial. Every inam for a charitable or religious purpose is not for the benefit of a charitable or religious institution.

4. The Deputy Collector has referred to a casual observation in the judgment of Imam J. in Ram Charan Law v. Fatima Begum I.L.R (1915) Cal. 933 which is as follows:.but it is the keeping up of the Mohurrum as an institution with all its moral effect on the general Mahomedan public.

The word 'institution' here is obviously used in the sense of a custom or practice. It would be wrong to draw from this sentence an inference that a grant for performing religious service is a grant to a religious institution. The question, which the Calcutta High Court had to decide, was also quite different and that was whether a waqf was created where with the object of dedicating a house to the service of the Imams, Hassan and Hussain and for other religious purposes, the settlor had conveyed the house to his grand-children on trust for the proper observance of the objects mentioned in the deed.

5. As the lands in the present case were granted as inam not to any society or organization but to five individuals and as the present holders of the inam are also some individuals, the inam cannot be said to have been held by or for the benefit of any charitable or religious institution. The service for rendering which the grant was made was a service to be rendered to a section of the Muslim community. The Inam would, therefore, be a community service inam within the meaning of the Act. Such an inam was abolished with effect from July 1, 1960, under Sub-section (2A) of Section 1 of the Act.

6. In our opinion, therefore, the view taken by the Deputy Collector and by Government is not correct. We set aside the orders made by them and hold that the inam was a community service inam which was abolished with effect from July 1, 1960.

7. No order as to costs.


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