Case Note & Summary
In this civil appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether abkari rights attached to inam lands stood abolished when the inams were abolished under the Hyderabad Inams Abolition Act, 1955. The appellant, holder of inam lands in Sardarnagar and Kurvaguda, Hyderabad District, claimed that his abkari rights—comprising Baithak (rental/licence fee for Sendhi shops), tree tax, and Haque Malikana (tree owners' fee)—were separate from the land and not extinguished by the abolition. The respondent State contended that all rights, title, and interest in the inam lands, including abkari rights, vested in the Government under the Act, and compensation under Section 12 covered the entire inam. The appellant's predecessors-in-interest had been granted the makta (inam) by the Nizam through muntakabs dated August 15, 1944, with terms 'Ba Hama-Abwab' (with all sources of income) and 'Bila-Quiyame-Haqe-Sirkar' (without deduction as Government share). The appellant enjoyed these rights until the Hyderabad Inams Abolition Act, 1955 came into force, whereupon the inams vested in the Government. The Government discontinued payment of abkari income. The appellant filed a suit for declaration and recovery. The trial court dismissed the suit, and the High Court affirmed, holding that abkari rights were not independent grants but appurtenant to the inam lands and therefore vested in the Government. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court by certificate. During pendency of the appeal, the Andhra Pradesh Legislature passed the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act 9 of 1967, repealing the 1955 Act as amended by Act 10 of 1956, and vesting all inams in the Government without compensation. The High Court of Andhra Pradesh struck down Act 9 of 1967 on March 31, 1970, and the State did not appeal. The State later issued a notification on October 20, 1973 under Section 1(3)(b) of the 1955 Act, enforcing the compensation provisions from November 1, 1973. Before the Supreme Court, the appellant argued that the striking down of Act 9 of 1967 did not revive the 1955 Act because a repealed Act cannot be revived automatically; the 1955 Act was constitutionally invalid for want of legislative competence of the Hyderabad Legislature (enacted before Seventh Amendment) and for violation of Article 31(2) by taking property without compensation; and Section 12 did not provide compensation for abkari rights. The respondent countered that the 1955 Act was a valid agrarian reform measure protected under Article 31A, and that abkari rights were appurtenant to land and thus included in the vesting and in the compensation under Section 12. The Court held that the striking down of Act 9 of 1967 resulted in revival of the 1955 Act; the inam lands had already vested in the State under the 1955 Act, so there was no estate left to abolish by the 1967 Act. On the substantive issue, the Court applied the definition of 'land' in Section 2(1-b) of the Andhra Pradesh Revenue Act 8 of 1317 Fasli, incorporated by Section 2(2) of the Abolition Act, which includes benefits arising from land and things attached to earth. The right to tap trees and derive benefit from them was appurtenant to the land; a thing attached to land is part of the land and immovable property. Similarly, the right to receive rental or licence fee for running Sendhi shops appertained to ownership of the land. Therefore, abkari rights were part of the inam and vested in the Government under Section 3(1) of the Abolition Act, notwithstanding any decree or order. Compensation under Section 12 was inclusive of abkari rights, as the Act provided for compensation for the entire inam. The Court also noted that the 1955 Act was legislation intended to give effect to agrarian reforms by making land available to the landless, and thus its compensation provisions could not be challenged. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Revival of Repealed Act - Striking down of repealing Act revives earlier Act - Hyderabad Inams Abolition Act, 1955; Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act 9 of 1967 - The High Court struck down Act 9 of 1967; the effect was to revive the 1955 Act; inam lands had already vested in State under 1955 Act, so there was no estate to abolish under 1967 Act - Held that the inam lands had already vested and no necessity to effect agrarian reform (Paras 1-11). B) Property Law - Abkari Rights as Appurtenant to Land - Definition of land includes benefits from land and things attached to earth - Hyderabad Inams Abolition Act, 1955, Section 2(2); Andhra Pradesh Revenue Act 8 of 1317 Fasli, Section 2(1-b) - Right to tap trees is appurtenant to land; thing attached to land is part of land; Haque Malikana and Baithak appertain to ownership of land - Held that Abkari rights being part of Inam lands vest in Government with abolition (Paras 1-11). C) Constitutional Law - Compensation for Acquisition - Compensation under Section 12 includes Abkari rights - Hyderabad Inams Abolition Act, 1955, Section 12 - Abkari rights being part of Inam vest in State; compensation payable under Section 12 is inclusive of Abkari rights; Act is agrarian reform protected under Article 31A - Held that compensation provision cannot be challenged (Paras 1-11). D) Constitutional Law - Legislative Competence - State legislature competence to enact Hyderabad Inams Abolition Act - Constitution of India, Article 31A, Seventh Amendment - Appellant challenged legislative competence of Hyderabad Legislature; the Act enacted prior to Seventh Amendment; since Act is agrarian reform, it is protected under Article 31A - Held that no lack of legislative competence (Paras 1-11).
Issue of Consideration
Whether striking down of Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act 9 of 1967 revives Hyderabad Inams Abolition Act, 1955 as amended by Act 10 of 1956; Whether Abkari rights (Baithak, tree tax, Haque Malikana) are included in 'Inam' and thus abolished and vested in Government under the Abolition Act; Whether compensation payable under Section 12 of Hyderabad Inams Abolition Act, 1955 includes compensation for abolition of Abkari rights; Whether Hyderabad Inams Abolition Act, 1955 is constitutionally invalid for want of legislative competence and for violation of Article 31(2)
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. The Court held that striking down of Act 9 of 1967 revived the Hyderabad Inams Abolition Act, 1955; Abkari rights being part of Inam lands vested in Government upon abolition; compensation under Section 12 of the 1955 Act includes compensation for abolition of Abkari rights; the Act is agrarian reform and not invalid under Article 31(2).
Law Points
- Striking down of a repealing Act revives the repealed Act
- Abkari rights appurtenant to land vest in Government upon abolition
- definition of land includes benefits arising from land and things attached to earth
- compensation under Section 12 of Hyderabad Inams Abolition Act
- 1955 includes compensation for Abkari rights
- legislation for agrarian reforms protected under Article 31A
