Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.26 seconds)
Documents citing Ramijyabi Maktumsaheb vs Gudusaheb on 11 September, 1951

The Village Panchayat Of Mamurabad vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. on 24 November, 1976

In taking this view we are fortified by the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Ramijyabi Maktumsaheb v. Gudusaheb, . In that case also the property which was originally watan property was continued with the holder without having to render services and with the full levy of assessment from him, the effect of such continuance being that the property ceased to be watan property and was converted into raytwari holding and the holder became an ordinary occupant thereof. It appears that thereafter the member of the family to whose Share the property had fallen gifted it to his grand-daughter. Thereupon the defendant who was the member of the family of the original Watandar applied to the revenue authorities to restore the property to him on the ground that it was japti sanadi inam land and was therefore inalienable under the Bombay Hereditary Offices Act, 1874. The Prant Officer to whom the application was made ordered restoration of possession.
Bombay High Court Cites 22 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Kacharu Lakhu Aher vs Masjid Mandwad Deosthan And Ors. on 12 October, 1989

In the case of Ramijiabi Maktumsaheb Jamadar v. Gudusaheb wd Faridsaheb Avati, reported in 54 Bom.L.R. 405 the provisions of Bombay Act II of 1863 along with the provisions of the Bombay Rent-free Estates Act (XI of 1852), and the Bombay Hereditary Offices Act, 1874 were considered by a Division Bench of this Court. The Court held that if property is, which was originally watan property continued with the holder thereof, but without the holder having render services and with full levy of assessment from him, the effect of such continuance is that the property ceases to be watan property and is converted into a ryotwari holding in which the holder is invested with the rights of an ordinary occupant. In the present case also though the lands have continued with the original holders there is no material to show that the holders have fulfilled their obligations attached to the Devasthan land. Full levy of assessment is also made on this land. The provisions of section 8 of Clause 3 are therefore not attracted.
Bombay High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 2 - S V Manohar - Full Document

Shankar Ragnath Kulkarni vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. on 24 November, 1993

In the absence of actual Terms and Conditions, non-requirement of rendering service and requirement of paying full assessment may lead to a presumption that the property had ceased to be a Watan land and was converted into ryotwari holding as held in Ramijyabi's case (supra). But actual Terms and Conditions are known in the case, which clearly indicate that Watan character of the lands were specifically retained.
Bombay High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1