RAMJI SHARMA @ RAMJI BABU (DEAD) BY LRS.versusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.
- Citation
- 1996 INSC 1083
- Decided
- 19 September 1996
- Disposal
- Dismissed
Holding
Urban lands intended for building purposes are not "land" within the meaning of Section 2(f) of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1961, and therefore Section 16(3) does not apply.
Summary
The appellants, co‑sharers of a parcel of land in the town of Hajipur, sought a re‑transfer of the land that had been sold to a third party under a registered deed. They invoked Section 16(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961, which allows a co‑sharer or adjoining raiyat to apply for transfer of the land within three months of registration. The Deputy Collector dismissed the application on the ground that the land, being urban and intended for building, did not fall within the definition of "land" under the Act; the Collector and the Board of Revenue upheld this view, but the High Court reversed, holding the land was covered by the Act. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the statutory definition of "land" and concluded that the Act applies only to land used or capable of being used for agriculture, horticulture, or as a homestead, not to urban plots meant for construction. Consequently, the Court affirmed the High Court’s finding that the land was outside the Act’s ambit and dismissed the appeal, allowing the appellant to withdraw the deposited amount.
Issues considered
- Whether land situated in an urban area and intended for building purposes falls within the definition of "land" under Section 2(f) of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1961.
- Whether Section 16(3) of the Act is applicable to a transfer of such urban land.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961s. 16(1), s. 16(3), s. 2(f), s. 2(g), s. 4
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908s. Order XXI Rule 34
Subjects
Judgment
A RAMJI SHARMA @ RAMJI BABU (DEAD) BY LRS.
v.
THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.
SEPTEMBER 19, 1996
B [N.P. SINGH AND S.B. MAJMUDAR, JJ.J·
Bilzar Land Refonns (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of
Surplus Land) Act, 1961:
C Sections 2(b), 2(g), 16(3)-Transfer of la11ds to any person other than
the co-sharer or a raiyat of adjoining land-Right of any co-sharer of the
transferor or any raiyat holdi11g land adjoi11i11g the land trans/eJTed, to make
an application for transfer of the land to him-Held : In view of the fact that
the lands in question were in the urban area, the High Court lightly rejected
the application-Appellant pennitted to withdraw the amount deposited by
D him alo11g with the application-Refund ordered to be made within three
months.
Fakir Mohammad v. Salahuddin & Ors., AIR (1975) Patna 119, ap-
proved.
E CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1505 of
1981.
From the Judgment and ::lrder dated 15.9.80 of the Patna High Court
in LP.A. No. 103 of 1980.
F L.R. Singh for the Appellants.
S.B. Sanyal, S.K. Sinha, R.P. Singh, AK. Pandey for the Respon-
dents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
G
This appeal has been filed for setting aside the judgment of the High
Court, dismissing the application under Section 16(3) of the Bihar Land
Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act,
1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) filed on behalf of the appellants,
H claiming retransfer of the lands which had been transferred by respondent
514
RAMJISHARMAv. STATE 515
No. 5 in favour of respondent No. 7 through the registered sale deed dated A
· 30.12.1969. The respondent No. 7 by the aforesaid sale deed purchased 5
· kathas of land of survey plot No. 610 and 6 kathas 10 dlutrs of land of survey
plot No. 614 from respondent No.5 for a consideration amount of Rs. 4,600.
The purchase had been made for construction of house in Mahalia Sah-
jadpur Aderkila within the town of Hajipur.
B
An application under sub-section (3) of Section 16 of the Act was
filed on behalf of the appellants before the Deputy Collector, Land
Reforms, for a direction that respondent No. 7, the transferee be directed
to convey the lands purchased by him by executing and registering a deed
of transfer in favour of the appellants in terms of the said sub-section (3) C
of Section 16. That application was dismissed by the Deputy Collector,
Land Reforms, on the ground that the lands which had been transferred
shall not be deemed to be the lands within the meaning of the Act, as such
.the provisions thereof shall not be applicable. However, an appeal being
filed on behalf of the appellants, was allowed by the Collector. The
Member, Board of Revenue, dismissed the Revision Application, filed on D
behalf of Respondent No. 7 Thereafter, a writ petition was filed on behalf
of Respondent No. 7, for quashing the orders passed by the Collector and
the Member, Board of Revenue before the High Court. The High Court
by the impugned judgment quashed the orders passed by the Collector and
the Member, Board of Revenue, on a finding that as the lands which had
been transferred were within the town of Hajipur and were urban in nature, E
the provisions of the Act shall not be applicable including sub-section (3)
of Section 16 thereof. This finding of the High Court is being questioned
in this appeal.
The Preamble of the Act says that it is an Act to provide for fixation
of ceiling, restriction on sub-letting and resumption bY\certain raiyats, for
F
personal cultivation of land, acquisition of status of raiyc\t by certain under
raiyats and acquisition of surplus land by the State in the State of Bihar
and matters connected therewith. Section 2(t) defines land :
"(t) "land" means land which is used or capable of beirtg used G
for agriculture or horticulture and includes land which is an or-
chard Kharhur or pasturage (or forest land or even land. peren-
nially submerged under water) or the homestead of the
land-holder;
Explanation I. - "Homestead" means a dwelling house for the H
'
516 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 6 S.C.R.
A purpose of living or for the purpose of letting out on rent together
with any courtyard, compound, attach~d garden, orchard and
out-building and includes any outbuilding of the purpo.;e con-
nected with agriculture or horticulture and any tank, liberary and
place of worship appertaining to such dwelling house.
B Explanation II. - Land perennially submerged under water shall
not include land submerged in the bed of a river."
c
Section 2(g) defines 'land holder' :
"(g) 'land holder' means a family as defined in clause (ee) holding
land as raiyat or as under-raiyat or a mortgagee or land in posses-
-
sion or holding land permanently settled by Government or lessee
of land not resumable by Government."
On a plain reading of the definition of land it means which is used or
D capable of being used for agriculture or horticulture or for the homestead
of a land-holder. Explanation I, specifies what is meant by homestead
which shall include dwelling house for the purpose of living or for the
purpose of letting out on rent together with courtyard, compound, attached
garden, orchard and includes any outbuilding for the purpose connected
E with agriculture or horticulture. Section 4 prescribes the ceiling area of the
land which a land-holder can hold under the provisions of the Act. The
other provisions relate to fixation of such ceiling and declaration of the
surplus land which shall vest in the State. Sub-section (1) of Section 16
provides that no person shall, after, the commencement of the Act, either
by himself or through any other person, acquire or possess by transfer,
F exchange, lease, mortgage, agreement or settlement any laild which
together with the land, if any, already held by him exceeds in the aggregate
the ceiling area. Sub-section (3) of Section 16 provides :
"3(i) When any transfer of land is made after the commence-
-
ment of this Act to any person other than a co-sharer or a raiyat
G of adjoining land, any co-sharer of the transferor or any raiyat
holding land adjoining the land transferred, shall be entitled, within
three months of the date of registration of the document of
transfer, to make an application before the Collector in the
prescribed manner for the transfer of the land to him on the terms
H and conditions contained in the said deed :
RAMJI SHARMA v. STATE 517
Provided that no such application shall be entertained by the A
Collector unless the purchase-money together with a sum equal to
ten per cent thereof is deposited in the prescribed manner within
the said period.
(ii) on such deposit being made the co-sharer or the raiyat shall B
be entitled to be put in possession of the land irrespective of the
fact that the application under clause (i) is pending for decision :
)
Provided that where the application is rejected, the co-sharer
or the raiyat, as the case may be, shall be evicted from the land
and possession thereof shall be restored to the transferer and the C
transferee shall be entitled to be paid a sum equal to ten per cent
of the purchase-money out of the deposit made under clause (i).
(iii) If the application is allowed, the Collector shall by an
order, direct the transferee to convey the land in favour of the D
applicant by executing and registering a document of transfer
within a period to be specified in the order and, if he neglects or
refuse to comply with the direction, the procedure proscribed in
Order XXI, Rule 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (IV of
1908), shall be, so far as may be, followed."
E
In view of sub-section (3) of Section 16, whenever any transfer of land is
made to any person other than the co-sharer or a raiyat of adjoining land,
any co-sharer of the transferor or any raiyat holding land adjoining the land
transferred, shall be entitled within the period prescribed therein to make
an application before the Collector for the transfer of the land to him on F
the terms and conditions contained in the said deed. He has to comply with
the other requirements of the said Section by way of deposit of purchase
money along with a sum equal to 10% thereof.
The question which is to be answered is as to whether the expression
land as defined in the Act will include not 'only the lands which are being G
used or capable of being used for agriculature or horticulture purposes but
also lands within the urban areas meant for building purposes. It is well
known that in and around the towns and urban areas at one point of time
most of the lands were being used for agriculture or horticulture purposes.
With growth of population and development activities slowly-slowly such H
518 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 6 S.C.R.
A agricultural lands are converted to uses which are non-agricultural. Many
colonies have been developed by the side of the old cities which at one
point of time were agriculture fields and crops used to be grown. But with
passage of time and cry for more plots of land for construction of buildings
they lost their original character and purpose. It appears that the farmers
B of the Act were quite conscious of this aspect of the matter, that is why
while defining 'land' they laid much emphasis in respect of the nature of
use such land was being put by saying that it meant land which is used or
(
capable of being used for agriculture or horticulture or the homestead of
the land-holder. It need not be pointed out that the sole object of the Act
C is to put ceiling on the lands held by land-holders for agriculture or
horticulture purposes and to declare the areas beyond the ceiling as surplus
which shall vest in the State Goverilment. In this background neither it can
be assumed nor it can be held that the framers of the Act had in mind even
the lands which are in the heart of the cities meant for construction of
buildings. It is a matter of common knowledge that even in areas which are
D completely urban in nature or even in a colony some plots are lying vacant
as no constructions have been made over the same for one reason or the
other including financial constraint. Till constructions are made they are
being used for growing some crops or fruits. But can it be said that such
plots which are meant for building purposes shall be deemed to be land
E within the meaning of Section 2(f) of the Act? According to us, the answer
is in negative. Whenever an application under sub-section (3) of Section
16 is filed, which is in respect of a land within the urban area, the
authorities or the High Court concerned should first examine what is the
primary-object for which such land was being used or is capable of being
used. If it is found that the land was being retained by the transferor or
F
was being transferred to another person for a purpose and object which is
not connected with agriculture then an application under sub-section (3) _j>
of Section 16 should not be entertained. On other hand, if the authorities
or the High Court are satisfied that the land which has been transferred is
fully covered by the definition of land as given under Section 2(f) then
G provision of the Act have to be applied for examining the question as to
whether the applicant was entitled for retransfer in his favour from the
transferee on the same terms and conditions. A Full Bench of the Patna
High Court in the case of Fakir Mohammad v. Salahuddin & Ors., AIR
(1975) PATNA 119, presided over by N.L. Untwalia, CJ. (as he then was)
H examined the scope of expression 'land' as defined in Section 2(±) of the
RAMJI SHARMA v. STATE 519
Act, It was observed : A
"The consensus of opinion - and, as I shall presently show, there
is no conflict in any of the decisions - is that a parti piece of land
belonging-to a raiyat, an agriculturist, which is his homestead on
which there is no dwelling house or any of the things as mentioned
B
in the Explanation, is not a land covered by Act. It has been fwther
pointed out that a land fit for building proposes not connected with
agriculture situated ordina1ily and general(v in town or bazaar areas,
to which are applicable the provisions of the Transfer of Property
Act, is not the homestead of a land-holder to made it a land within
the meaning of Section 2(f)." c
(Emphasis supplied)
We are in agreement with the view expressed in the aforesaid judgment of
the Full Bench. D
So far the facts of the present case are concerned, the High Court
has rejected the contention that the land in question can be held to be land
within the meaning of Section 2(t) merely because in the Kathian Entry it
had been recorded as Bhit Land. The High Court in the impugned order
has observed : E
"It goes without saying that all the urban lands at some point
to time or the other were rural in nature where agricultural
operations were carried on. Therefore, mere description of the
land as a Bhit Land by the Survey authorities would not be a F
conclusive proof that land was agricultural in nature. The fast
development and urbanisation of the town of Hazipur which has
very recently been made a district, cannot be lost sight of. There-
fore, I would accept the second contention of Mr. Krishna Prakash
Sinha and hold that the pre-emptor has not succeeded in estab-
lishing his case that the disputed land was a land within the G
meaning of the provisions of the Act to which the provisions of
section 16(3) would apply."
In view of the findings recorded by the High Court that the land which
have been transferred were in the town of Hajipur and in the urban area, H
520 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996) SUPP. 6 S.C.R.
A the application filed under sub-section (3) of Section 16 has been rightly
dismissed. Accordingly, appeal fails and it is dismissed. There shall be no
orders as to cost.
The appellant shall be permitted to withdraw the amount which has
been deposited on behalf of the appellant in connection with the applica-
B tion under sub-section (3) of Section 16 of the Act. The refund shall be
made within three months from the date of the filing of the application on
behalf of the appellant.
G.N. Appeal dismissed.
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.