AIR 1952 SUPREME COURT 138

Supreme Court Of India

From Bombay

Hon'ble Judge(s): M. Patanjali Sastri, S. R. Das, Vivian Bose , JJJ

(A) Bombay Revenue Jurisdiction Act (10 of 1876) , S.4(a)— Claim against Crown relating to lands held as saranjam - Claim against Government and others - Separate consideration of reliefs claimed against latter. The common ancestor of the plaintiff and defendants - 1 and 2 who baloneed to three different branches of the family was a British Grantee of a Saranjam estate. As a result of partition each branch was in the enjoyment of a separate share of the estate. On the death of the plaintiff's father the Governor-in-Council directed by a resolution passed in 1932 that the Saranjam should be formally resumed and regranted to the plaintiff and that it should be entered in his sole name in the accounts of the Collector. However in 1936 the Governor-in Council passed another resolution in modification of the previous one directing that the estate held by the plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 should be entered in the Revenue Records as de facto shares in the estate held by them as representatives of three branches of the family. The plaintiff thereupon brought a suit against defendants 1 and 2 and the State of Bombay attacking the resolution of 1936 as ultra vires and praying inter alia for declarations that defendants 1 and 2 had no right to go behind the order of the Government as per resolution of 1932 under which he was entitled to be recognised as the sole Sar....