Meaning of land under Delhi Land Reforms Act

Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 — Section — 2(13)

(10) Section 2(13) of the Act defines “land” as under :

“”land” except in Sections 23 and 24, means land held or occupied for purposes connected with agriculture, horticulture or animal husbandry including pisciculture and poultry farming and includes- (a) buildings appurtenant thereto, (b) village abadis, (c) grovelands, (d) lands for village pasture or land covered by water and used for growing sigharas and other produce or land in the bed of a river and used for casual or occasional cultivation, but does not include- land occupied by buildings in belts of areas adjacent to Delhi town and New Delhi town, which the Chief Commissioner may by a notification in the official Gazette declare as an acquisition thereto.”

On its plain language it is manifest that any land before it can be termed land” for the purpose of the Act must be held or occupied for purposes connected with agriculture, horticulture or animal husbandry etc. Admittedly the land in question has not been used for any of the purposes contemplated therein since 1960 or even earlier when the layout plan was submitted to the CorporationCorporation A legally established entity that can enter into contracts, own assets and incur debt, as well as sue and be sued—all separately from its owner(s). The term covers both for-profit and nonprofit corporations and includes nonstock corporations, incorporated membership organizations, incorporated cooperatives, incorporated trade associations, professional corporations and, under certain circumstances, limited liability companies. for necessary sanction. It is so stated not only in the sale deeds executed by Raghbir Singh, respondent No. 2, in favor of the petitioner as well as respondent No. 4 but is also manifest from the khasra girdavari for the year 1965-66, a copy of which is to be found at page 271 of the trial Court record. Its perusal would show that while Raghbir Singh was recorded as bhumidar under column 4 thereof the whole of the land has been described as “Gair Mumkin Plot Wa Makan,” i.e. uncultivable land under plots and buildings. It thus ceased to be land for the purposes of the Act. If that be so, the provisions thereof will no longer apply and the remedy of the aggrieved party, if any, would be under the general law of the land. As stated in the preamble to the Act itself, the Act was designed to provide for modification of zamindari system so as to create a uniform body of peasant proprietors without intermediaries, for the unification of the Punjab and Agra systems of tenancy laws in force in the State of Delhi Fand to make provision for other matters connected therewith. Consequently, the erstwhile proprietors of agricultural land in the Union Territory of Delhi ceased to exist after the Act came into force and if any land was part of a holding of a proprietor he became a bhnmidar of it. If it was part of a holding of some other person such as tenant or sub-tenant etc. he became either a bhumidar or an asami, whereupon the rights of the proprietor in that land ceased. Lands, which were not holdings of either the proprietor .

So under the provisions of the Act, a person could either be a bhumidar of agricultural land or he could be an asami. (See Section 4(1) of the Act). Section 22 of the Act provides that :

“A Bhumidar or Asami shall, subject to the provisions of this Act, have the right to the exclusive possession of all land comprised in his respective holding and to use land for any purpose connected with agriculture, horticulture or animal husbandry which includes pisciculture and poultry farming and to make any improvement.”

 Evidently user of the land for any purpose other than that connected with agriculture, horticulture or animal husbandry etc. by a bhumidar is prohibited by this Section. However, Section 23 allows a bhumidar or an asamis to use his holding or part thereof for industrial purposes other than those immediately connected with any of the purposes referred to in Section 22 if the same is situated within the belt declared for the purpose by the Chief Commissioner by notification in the official gazette. He may also do so after obtaining sanction of the Chief Commissioner in the prescribed manner even though the land does not lie within such a belt. It is thus essential for a bhumidar to retain possession of its holding at all material times and to use the same for the purposes specified in Section 22 only if he is to continue to be a bhumidar. Section 33(1) debars a bhumidar from transferring by sale or gift or otherwise any land to any person other than a religious or charitable institution if as a result of the transfer, the transferor shall be left with less than eight standard acres of land in the Union Territory of Delhi. Of course, he can transfer the whole of his land as envisaged in Sub-section (2) of Section 33 if his entire holding is less than eight standard acres.

 Section 35 debars a bhumidar from letting, for any period whatsoever, any land comprised in his holding except in the cases provided for in Section 36. Section 36 enumerates the categories of bhumidars who are permitted to let the whole or any part of his holding. These include widows, minors, lunatics and persons incapable of cultivating themselves by reason of blindness or physical infirmity etc. u/s 43 of the Act, transfer of holding or part thereof accompanied with possession is deemed to be a sale. Section 44 lays down the consequences which flow from a bhumidar letting his holding or part of it in contravention of the provisions contained in Section 35 and 36 of the Act and the lessee shall then be deemed to be purchaser within the meanings of Sections 33 and 42. The latter Section provides that on transfer of any holding or a part thereof by a bhumidar in contravention of the provisions of the Act, the transferee and every other person who may have obtained possession of such holding shall notwithstanding anything in any law be liable to ejectment from such holding or part thereof on the suit of the Gaon Sabha. Even the revenue assistant on receipt of information about the same can take action on his own motion to eject the transferee and every person who may have obtained possession, as stated above. Section 47 provides for the consequences of ejectment winder Section 42 and lays down that all the rights and interests of bhumidar in the holding shall stand extinguished.

 Section 81 of the Act too provides for penalty which a bhumidar may entail if he uses the land for any purpose other than a purpose connected with agriculture, horticulture or animal husbandry, the penalty being that he is liable to ejectment on the suit of the Gaon Sabha and he is also liable to pay damages. Thus, on a bare perusal of the foregoing provisions of the Act it is manifest that the bhumidar is bound not only to retain possession of his land but also use it for specified purposes at all material times if he is to continue to be a bhumidar. A perusal of Section 84 to 87 would further countenance this conclusion.

In Ram Mehar v. Mst. Dakhan, (1972) Ii Delhi 922, a Division Bench of Delhi High  Court had an occasion to consider all these and some other provisions of the Act in order to determine whether succession to bhumidari of a HinduHindu A geographical name given by non-Hindus, who came to visit Bharatvarsha (Hindusthan). Sanatan Dharma is the actual Dharmic tradition of the Hindus. People who live in Hindusthan are Hindu, whether they Follow Islam, Chris, Buddha, Mahavira, or Nanaka. In this way, Tribals are also Hindu. bhumidar was governed by the provisions of the Act or Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Their Lordships held that :

“THUS,it is quite plain that the interests of a bhumidar is quite different from that of a normal tenant. But it is quite clear from the various provisions of the Act detailed above that a bhumidar has not an unrestricted interest of his land. He is given the right to use the land in a particular manner. He cannot lease out the land, be cannot transfer possession of it and he has to use it for agriculture. In a sense the bhumidar can be described as a tenant holding land under the State.”

 Still later, another Division Bench of Delhi High Court considered all these and other provisions of the Act in order to determine whether alienation of bhumidari rights could be challenged by the female lineal of the bhumidar under the customary law or whether the right and interest of bhumidar in agricultural land were controlled by the provisions of the Act only. Observed their Lordships: .

“THESE provisions and various other provisions of the Act show that a Bhumidar does not have an unrestricted interest in the agricultural land which was held by him before the commencement of the Act as an owner or proprietor. After the commencement of the Act and the declaration of the Bhumidari rights, he is only given the right to use the agricultural land in a particular manner as specified in the statutory provisions. There are restrictions laid down on the rights of a Bhumidar to create leases. A Bhumidar cannot transfer possession of the land. A Bhumidar is obliged to use the land for agricultural purposes. A Bhumidar is only a tenure holder having lost the right of ownership on agricultural land after the commencement of the Act. There is, however, a great security of the tenure under the Act. Bhumidari rights are, Therefore, special rights created on the abolition of the ownership of the agricultural land and are controlled and regulated by the provisions of the Act. The language of Section 5 of the Act shows that a Bhumidar has all the rights and is subject to all the liabilities conferred or imposed upon a Bhumidar by or under the Act. The rights to the tenure holder arc granted under the provisions of the Act. The restrictions imposed on the rights of a Bhumidar arc also by or under the Act. There is no warrant to travel outside the Act, and the Rules for further restrictions in the right or manner of transfer of the Bhumidari rights.”