of U.P. Vs. Banke Singh & Anr  INSC
139 (25 January 1996)
K.Ramaswamy, K.G.B. Pattanaik (J)
JT 1996 (2) 517 1996 SCALE (2)128
O R D
special leave petition arises from the order of the High Court of Allahabad, Lucknow
Bench made on September
21, 1988 in Writ
Petition No.1731 of 1984.
the respondents had been served earlier and Sri Mukul Mudgal who had taken
notice has reported on September
1, 1995 that he could
not appear and stated that he be permitted to withdraw from the undertaking. He
has also not filed his Vakalatnama. In these circumstances, since respondents
are not represented, learned counsel for the appellant was directed to produce
necessary material on the basis of which respondent Banke Singh became owner of
the land. The learned counsel has now produced the records.
only question in this case is: whether the respondents would get benefit of
l/4th share in the surplus land declared by the competent authority? On September 8, 1982, Krishan Pal Singh filed objection,
who claimed land of Khata Nos. 340, 341 and Khata No.33 of village Nawada and Khata No.77
of Village Jamla Jot on the basis of a will executed by Smt. Gajraji. On that
basis, the said land is required to be excluded from the surplus land. The
primary authority had rejected the claim by proceedings dated July 30, l983 and
on appeal the District Judge allowed the appeal by order dated November 9, 1983
and excluded 1/4th of the land held by Gajraji on the basis of the Will dated
September 2, 1978. When it was questioned, the High Court dismissed Writ
Petition No.1731/84. Hence, this appeal by special leave.
5 of the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 (U.P. Act No.l
of 1961) (for short, 'the Act') in Chapter II imposes ceiling on land holdings.
exemption mentioned in the Article gets excluded from surplus land. Section 5
postulates that on and from the commencement of the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of
Ceiling on Land Holdings (Amendment) Act, 1972, no tenure-holder shall be
entitled to hold in the aggregate throughout Uttar Pradesh, any land in excess
of ceiling area applicable to him.
(6) postulates determination of the ceiling area applicable to a tenure-holder.
It provides that any transfer of land made after the 24th day of January 1971,
which but for the transfer, would have been declared surplus land under this
Act, shall be ignored and not taken into account. Explanation-I provides that
for the purpose of this sub-section the expression transfer of land made after
the twenty-fourth day of January, 1971 includes, among other things, - any
admission, acknowledgement, relinquishment or declaration in favour of a person
to the like effect, made in any other deed or instrument or in any other
manner, shall be construed to be a transfer for the purpose of sub- section
the Will was executed on February
10, 1978 long after
the specified date. By the Will a devise was made by Gajraji, owner of the land
bequeathing her 1/4th share in favour of her brother's grand-son, Krishan Pratap
it must be construed to be a devise "in any other manner" within the
meaning of Explanation I (b) of sub- section (6) of the Act. It shall be
ignored for the purpose of determination of the surplus land. the High Court
and the appellate authority, therefore, were not right in directing to exclude
the said land.
appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.
Pages: 1 2