Back
ANDHRA PRADESH (ANDHRA AREA) ESTATES LAND ACT, 1908
ANDHRA PRADESH (ANDHRA AREA) ESTATES LAND ACT, 1908
Section 1 Scope
The rights inter se between the minor inamdar and the ryots holding under him would be governed by the provisions of the Act and the land-holder would even after the notification be entitled to recover rents from his ryots under the provisions of the Act but only at the rates fixed under the Madras Act XXX of 1947. (1955 (1) An.W.R. 842) Right of the landholder to sell holding absolutely for non-payment of rent does not depend upon registered pattadar being a full owner or limited owner. Rule of personal law cannot control the operation of statute. (1956 An.W.R 1125. Cultivable land is land that can be brought under cultivation without undue expenditure of money and labour. (1971) 84 M.L.W. 727. Government seeking to take over possession of Palyam enfranchised as inam, which is not Zamindari estate - Writ is appropriate remedy. (AIR 1957 AP 23). Failure by Tribunal to note statutory presumption constitutes an error apparent on the face of the judgment of the Tribunal. (1956 An W.R. (NRC) 23. Abolition of Estate - Consequences and effect of - Claim of royalty made by the Government in respect of manganese ore won from the dumps in taken over Zamindari village - Royalty - Mean M ing of. A.S.241 and 242/68 dt. 22-1-73. The character of lands which were situated in a Zeroyti village forming part of permanently settled estate, did not cease to be such even though they were obtained by the landholders in exchange for lands in a presettlement inam. Civil Courts have no jurisdiction to entertain a suit to eject tenants from such lands. The nature of the land did not change because of the exchange. AIR 1953 Mad 562 The civil Court cannot maintain the suit for recovery of arrears of rent in respect of lands which admittedly were, at one time ryoti lands. The suit should be filed in a revenue Court and not in Civil Court. AIR 1957 Mad 671.
Section 2 Section-3(2)(a)
Even if the Madras Permanent Settlement Regulation did not apply, the Polavaram Zamindari was a permanently settled estate, because its peishkush was fixed and from the kabuliyat which was executed by the proprietor it conformed to the pattern of the sanads and kabuliyats issued under the Madras Permanent Settlement Regulation. AIR 1967 SC 71. In order to constitute a grant in inam, the mere use of the expression "inam" or 'gift' is wholly inconclusive unless along with such expression there is an indication that the grantee was to enjoy the land either totally free of rent or to have partial remission of the Government's share of the revenue. (1962) 1 MLJ 20.
Section 3 Section-3(2)(d)
(i) Estate
(ii) Tests to determine
(iii) Confirmed or recognised'
(iv) Whole or named village
(v) Explanation (1)
(vi) Explanation (1-B)
(vii) Evidence and proof
Section 4 Section-3(2)(e)
Though Explanation 1 is not part of S.3 (2) (e), there is no reason why the principle embodied in the Explanation I should not be applied to the expression village in S.3 (2) (e). Therefore a named village would be an estate within the meaning of Section 3 (2) (e) even if there were other minor personal inams carved out of it prior to the grant of the village. AIR 1954 Mad 772. Resumption of grant - If the grant is reasonable if it is not a permanent one and does not become an under tenure estate - When it is resumed all the s of the grantee come to an end. A.S.127/67 dt. 23-10-70. Grant in favour of a religious or chartiable institution - Does not amount to an undertenure. 1960 (1) An.W.R. (NRC) 21.
Section 5 Section-3(10)-Private Land
Mode of proving land as private land is personal cultivation by landholder for twelve years prior to 1908 or leasing out on short terms leases - It can also be proved by other methods provided such land is shown to be not ryoti at its inception. 1979 (2) An.W.R. 177. Order of the Settlement Officer holding that certain lands are private lands of the landholder - Tribunal setting aside that order on the ground that the presumption under section 185 was not rebutted by the landholder and short-term lease does not entitle the landholder to claim them as private lands - Not sustainable. 1978 (1) APLJ (NRC) 47. There must be evidence, direct or substantial that the lands were cultivated personally by the landholder as envisaged under Sec.3 (10) (a) of the Estates Land Act. When the landholder never had any intention to resume the land for personal cultivation and all through, though there is change of tenant, the lands in dispute were in continuous possession and enjoyment by the tenants in their own as tenants, the lands cannot be said to be private lands 1986 (2) ALT 8 (NRC). Test of personal cultivation is not sole test - Intention to resume land for personal cultivation can be established by landholder by giving on short term leases to tenants - Admission of tenants that landholder is absolute owner is also relevant to determine whether particular land is private land or not 1976 (1) An.WR 256 1975 LR 290 1975 ALT 513 1975 APHN 403. Decision of the Settlement Officer that the landholder is not entitled to ryotwari patta in a village which was in a part of an inam estate - Lands belonged to the landholder being private lands immediately before the notified date - Landholder has to prove - Otherwise such lands can be presumed to be not private land of the landholder. 1976 (2) APLJ (NRC) 20. Definition of private land - Grant of short term leases - Does not alone destroy the character of private Land - Burden lies on the landholder to prove that the land is private land 1973 APHN 96. A landholder can prove that the land situated in an estate' held by him is a private land of his, by showing that he had (i) cultivated the land or leased out the land on short-term leases (ii) the intention to cultivate or reserve for cultivation of the land; such intention can be established by any other means not necessarily by cultivation alone, and (iii) by continuous course of conduct on the part of the landholder asserting and acting on the footing that he is absolute owner thereof and recognition and acceptance of the tenants that the landholder had an absolute in the land 1973 APHN 163. Private Land - Tests formulated in Perianna's case held good law. 1971 (II) ALT 17. The definition read as a whole indicates clearly that the ordinary test for private land is the test of retention by the landholder for his personal use and cultivation by him or under his personal supervision. AIR 1968 SC 1005. The word 'domain' occurring in Sec.3 (10) cannot in any event be deemed to refer to lands appurtenant to the landholder's residence at any rate, in respect of estates falling under Sec.3 (a) (d) - Proof of personal cultivation should undoubtedly be used as a very cogent piece of evidence to prove that the land in dispute was private land - But statutory provisions did not make the proof of personal cultivation a requirement for sustaining a claim that a piece of land was held by the landholder as private land - Existence of a dicta suggestive of an inconsistency is insufficient foundation for invoking the rule of implied over ruling W.P.No.93/70 dt. 20-11-70. Private land - Home farm lands of the landholder - Finding of the Tribunal that the tenants were never inducted as tenants in 1943 and they were never in possession of those lands - Landholder has to claim patta under Sec.12 (a) of the Madras Estates Abolition Act. W.P.No.1384/68 dt. 22-3-71. The domain or home farm land of the landholder comes directly within the meaning of "Private Land" - Lands cultivated as private lands by the landholder for a continuous period of 12 years immediately before the Act also are covered by that expression 1965 (2) An.W.R.426. Actual cultivation should be the test for ascertaining whether a plot of land is a private land or not - Absence of cultivation is sufficient to reject the claim that the land is nevertheless a private land. (1960 (2) An.W.R. 405 1960 ALT 967. Old-waste - Recitals in leases that land is old estate - s inter se between the lessor and lessee - They do not establish that they are private lands. 1959 An.W.R. 110. Private land - Burden of proof - Land which was ryoti could be converted into private land if the landlord could establish personal cultivation for a period of 12 years prior to the coming into force of the Act - Where it has not been established that the land is ryoti and no question of its conversion into private land is involved and the Court has to determine as to whether the land is ryoti or private, the essential conditions of proof of 12 years continuous personal cultivation of the zamindar under Sec.3 (10) of the Act is not required 1959 (1) An.W.R. 254. The fact that the lands are not situated on all the four sides of the temple will not detract from their character as domain of home farm land if they have been cultivated as such or that the inamdar had the intention of cultivating them without losing his proprietary s in the land. AIR 1958 Mad 95. Where the lands in suit were not such kudiwaram lands and were admittedly wholly uncultivated before they were granted on lease and delivered into the possession of the lessee, they can never be called home farm lands or private lands at their inception by any stretch of imagination AIR 1958 Mad 80. The definition in S.3 (10) (a) of the Act does not expressly or even by implication exclude the land which is in use as a tank used exclusively to irrigate the cultivated private lands of the landlord. The actual cultivation, continuous or intermittent, is not the only test to apply in deciding whether a given piece of land is within the scope of Section 3 (10) (a). AIR 1958 Mad 74. Lanka lands becoming private lands of the landholder - Midstream lankas - Whether accretions to the estate village - The manner of acquisition, the precarious nature of the lands, the periodical auctions with varying rents and change of ryots, the terms of the lease and the admissions of the tenants in the muchilikas all lead only to one conclusion namely that they are private lands of the Zamindar - Where it is clear that the lanka was formed in the middle of the river and the river separates the lanka from the estate village, the lanka could not have been an accretion to the village. 1956 An.W.R. (NRC) 105 1956 ALT (NRC) 59. Lanka lands when can be treated as private lands - Circumstances to be considered are the manner in which lankas are formed, the treatment of lankas by the landholder from their inception, the way they were enjoyed, whether by direct cultivation or short-term leases, the assertion by the landholder as private lands, the acquiescence of the tenants in the landlords title and the conduct of the tenants themselves 1957 (2) An.W.R. 536 1957 ALT 857. Private land - It is not necessary to prove in every case 12 years continuous possession prior to 1908 in order to establish that land is private land. 1957 (1) An.W.R. 332. Landholder - Possession of both warams - Holding lands for agricultural purposes - Sufficient to attract Sec.3 (10) (a). 1957 ALT (NRC) 18. The burden of proof that a particular land in an estate is private land rests on the landholder, the statutory presumption being the other way. This burden is not discharged merely by proving that both the warams were granted to or enjoyed by the landholder once upon a time. There must be evidence of the treatment of the lands as private lands by the landholder, either by direct cultivation or otherwise. AIR 1952 Mad 323.
Section 6 Section-3(11)
State is empowered to collect cess from tenants as rents - Landlord, after vesting of estates, cannot recover from State monies not collected as cess (1968) 1 Mad LJ 312.
Section 7 Section-3(15)
A person who was in continuous adverse possession for a period of 12 years of land which was neither private land nor falling under S.3 (16) of the Act, became a ryot by virtue of explanation to S.3 (15) of the Act, and therefore, became liable to pay rent to the landholder under S.4 of the Act. The land continues to be part of a permanently settled estate and is undoubtedly a ryoti land and the mere fact that the person kept the land without any payment of rent to the Zamindar could not affect that character. AIR 1953 Mad 976. S.3(15) cannot be read as to permit the taking on of the possession of two or more trespassers - The underlying principle of the explanation is that where a party has been in continuous occupation of the ryoti land and that the landholder failed to take necessary steps to evict him within a period of 12 years the of occupancy is acquired by such continuous possession - The requisite condition for the application of Sec.3 (15) is that the possession of the party claiming the benefit under the Explanation has been subsisting for at least 12 years S.A.40/66 DT. 18-3-70.
Section 8 Section-3(16)-Ryoti land
Waste lands covered with shrubs, jungle and the like cannot be held to be uncultivable merely on that account or on account of their being not cultivated for a long time. Land which can be brought under cultivation without any undue expenditure of money and labour is cultivable land unless some provision of law provides for holding it otherwise in certain circumstances AIR 1965 SC 338. Assessment of tank beds situate in upper reaches of a tank for temporary cultivation will not convert them into ryoti land by reason of such cultivation only - They will retain their character of tank beds which are within the purview of Sec.3 (16) of the Act. 1965 (2) An.W.R. 286. Service Inam Lands - They are excluded from the category of Ryoti Lands - The tenants of a grantee cannot acquire occupancy s. (1960) (1) An.W.R. 13. Land known to be ryoti land - Evidence of personal cultivation of 12 years before the commencement of the Act - Not essential 1959 ALT (NRC) 49. Lands granted on service tenure - The exclusion in the definition of 'Ryoti land' in Sec.3 (16) of the Act of lands granted on service tenure from the category of ryoti land relates to lands granted by an erstwhile owner of any of the different kinds of property which became estate by the provisions of the Act. 1959 ALT (NRC) 32. Padugal lands mean lands on the lower level bank breadth of the river between the edge of the sandy stream bed and the high flood level bank and formed when the silt gets deposited adjacent to the high flood level bank. These are mere accretions to the bund of the river. These padugai lands are not ryoti lands as defined in S.3 (16) of the Act. (1959) 1 M M LJ 114: Un-authorised occupation of beds of irrigation - Unauthorised occupants cannot be evicted after the expiry of 30 years from the commencement of their occupation - Sec.21 applies in terms to all cases of unauthorised occupation of channel porambokes whether such occupation commenced before or after the amendment of that section and of Section 3 (16) (a) of the Act in 1934 by the inclusion of the beds of irrigation and drainage channels within their ambit. (1955 An.W.R. (NRC) 79). Merely because tanks are dug on ryoti land, the nature of land used as beds and bunds of tanks is not changed. AIR 1972 Orissa 248. Zamindar has proprietory rights in the beds and bunds of irrigation channels and tanks in the estate - They cannot use them to the prejudice of the rights of the village community - Ryots have no right of occupancy in respect of them (1955 ALT (NRC) 89). Any land which can be cultivated systematically will be "cultivated land". A land which has remained uncultivated so far, but which could be reclaimed and brought under cultivation would, when granted on lease, entitle the lessee to occupancy s as such land would be cultivable land' under S.3 (16), and therefore, ryoti land. Of course there are some lands in an estate which are not cultivable at all, like hill tops, permanently submerged lands etc. and they will be incapable of being claimed as ryoti lands, with occupancy rights, by lessee for grazing fishing etc. AIR 1958 Mad 80.
