Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

15. Relying on the above extracted portion of the said Act, the learned counsel appearing for the private respondents 2 to 8 and 10 to 19 submitted that the individuals rendering service are the Hereditary Poojaris and therefore, Ex.R-1 http://www.judis.nic.in proceedings having been issued under Section 8(2)(ii) of the said Act, the Ryotwari Patta is deemed to have been also granted to the individuals rendering service, namely the Hereditary Poojaris. That is the reason as to why the names of the Hereditary Poojaris have been entered in Ex.R-1. These private respondents herein were rendering service to the Temple as Hereditary Poojaris without receiving any remuneration and hence, the Temple in its counter statement before the Court below, stated that the disputed lands were in possession of the Hereditary Poojaris as "Service Inam". The learned counsel appearing for the private respondents 2 to 8 and 10 to 19/Hereditary Poojaris further submitted that on the date of issuance of the Notification for acquisition of land(s), the land(s) were under possession of these private respondents in their capacity as Service Inam-holders. Hence, for all the above reasons, the learned counsel appearing for the private respondents 2 to 8 and 10 to 19 herein prayed that these private respondents/Hereditary Poojaris are also entitled for compensation amount as apportioned by the Court below in the impugned order.