Civil Revision Petition No.3364 of 1974
The High Court of Judicature at Madras, through the Honourable Mr. Justice Nainar Sundaram, issued Civil Revision Petition No.3364 of 1974 on the twenty seventh day of April, one thousand nine hundred and seventy eight. The Court dismissed a landowner's request to exclude land settled on a minor son from the landowner's holding under Tamil Nadu Act 58 of 1961, as amended by Tamil Nadu Act 17 of 1970.
What the court considered
Civil Revision Petition No.3364 of 1974 concerned whether land covered by a settlement deed in favour of the landowner's minor son should be excluded when calculating the landowner's holding under Tamil Nadu Act 58 of 1961, as amended by Tamil Nadu Act 17 of 1970.
The petition was filed under Section 83 of Act 58 of 1961, as amended, and Section 113 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It asked the High Court of Judicature at Madras to revise the Land Tribunal's order dated 11 October 1974 in CMA No.63 of 1973.
Who was involved
Civil Revision Petition No.3364 of 1974 was brought by R. Manorama, identified as the landowner and petitioner. The respondent was the State of Tamil Nadu, represented by the Collector of Thanjavur.
The earlier decision came from the Land Tribunal, Subordinate Judge, Mayuram, and related to an order of the Authorised Officer (Land Reforms), Mayuram.
Key findings
The High Court of Judicature at Madras recorded the following points:
- The landowner relied on Section 21 and sought to exclude the settlement deed made in favour of a minor son.
- The judgment first describes the settlement deed as dated 2 December 1969, but later describes its date as 22 February 1969. The source therefore contains two different dates for the same deed.
- The Court held that the deed did not come within the dates of 15 February 1970 and 2 October 1970 set out in Section 21-A.
- The Court also found that the definition of family in Section 3(14) included the minor son and his holding.
- The Court found no error in law in the decision of the forum below that would justify interference in revision.
Result and practical relevance
The High Court of Judicature at Madras dismissed Civil Revision Petition No.3364 of 1974 and made no order as to costs. The Land Tribunal's refusal to exclude the minor son's holding therefore remained undisturbed.
For landowners dealing with ceiling calculations under the legislation identified in the judgment, the decision shows that transferring land to a minor son did not, on these facts, remove that land from the family holding.
This summary is generated from the source document to help you find what is relevant. The PDF above is authoritative. For advice on your own property, use LandLens One or speak to a qualified professional.
Common questions
Was the land settled on the minor son excluded from the landowner's holding?
No. The High Court upheld the Land Tribunal's refusal to exclude it.
Why did the Court include the minor son's land?
The Court stated that the deed did not come within the dates set out in Section 21-A. It also held that the definition of family in Section 3(14) included the minor son and his holding.
What date did the Court give for the settlement deed?
The source is inconsistent. It first gives 2 December 1969 and later gives 22 February 1969 for the settlement deed.
Did the High Court award costs?
No. Civil Revision Petition No.3364 of 1974 was dismissed with no order as to costs.
