Case: Shyamsunder Tikam Shet &amp; Anr Vs. State Of Maharashtra &amp; Anr

2. On October 9, 1950 the appellants made an application before the Collector of Kolaba for obtaining compensation for Khoti rights in respect of reserved forest and unassessed lands in accordance with the provisions of the Bombay Khoti Abolition Act, 1949 (Act No. VI of 1950) (hereinafter referred to as the Act). In the application, the appellants stated that the village Kotheri in Taluka Mahal was a Khoti village of Pat (leasehold) and that the appellant had a Khoti share of Re. 0-12-11/2 in the village. The appellants said that the total compensation which they claimed for the entire village came to Rs. 17,615/- and that the share of Re. 0-12-1 1/3 came to Rs. 13,333-9-0. The appellants further claimed a sum of Rs. 7,480/- in respect of loss under the reserved forest (74 acres 32 gunthas) and a sum of Rs. 6,850/- being the one-third share of "the price at the present market rate of the trees etc., that at present stand in the reserved forest". On January 31, 1962 the appellants filed before the Special Deputy Collector, Kolaba a preliminary statement. In that statement the appellants contended that the Khots used to guard the forest in their proprietary rights in about the year 1860 A. D. and that the said land had been taken to the reserved forest. The appellants further contended that they had a partnership with the State in respect of forest income, that is, in the division of agricultural produce and that the "partnership in the forest income has not been abolished under the Khoti Abolition Act and the partnership is still subsisting." The appellants said that "the question of determining compensation for the forest partnership cannot, therefore, arise." On May 15, 1962 the Special Deputy Collector (Khoti) Kolaba made his award granting a sum of Rs. 837.94 as compensation. Aggrieved by the award the appellants preferred an appeal before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal being Revenue Appeal No. REV.A 40 of 1962. On September 16, 1963, the appellants submitted before the Tribunal their written arguments. On September 18, 1964, November 21, 1964 and February 1, 1965 the appellants filed before the Tribunal further supplementary arguments in writing. On February 21, 1965 the Tribunal delivered its judgment holding that the Khoti in the Kolaba cannot claim proprietary rights in the village or in the reserved forest unless he proves that he has separate sanad or grant conveying to him these proprietary rights. The Tribunal, however, took the view that the appellants were not bound by any compromise decree and the Special Deputy Collector has dealt with the matter in a perfunctory manner. The tribunal therefore, set aside the award and remanded the case for retrial setting out the points to be decided by the Special Deputy Collector.

Court's reasoning:
6. The legal position is well established that khotis in the district of Kolaba are hereditary farmers of land revenue and are entitled to hold villages as khotis on their entering every year into the customarywish to make it clear that it will be open to the appellants to show before the Special Duty Collector how far this document has a bearing on their claim to proprietary right of Survey Plots Nos. 130 and 132.9. It is clear that in the absence of a sanad or a deed or a grant granting proprietary rights over the soil a Khot is not the proprietor of the lands constituted as reserved forests in the Khoti village and is not entitled to any proprietary right in the uncultivated or forestis necessary in this context to refer to the presumption that forest tracts and old waste belong to Government unless the presumption is displaced by positive evidence that Government has granted rights in any particular tract or piece of land or has consciously allowed adverse rights to grow therein. (See K. Ambu Nair v. Secretary of State for India, 51 Ind App 257 = (AIR 1924 PC 150)).In the present case the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal has remanded the case for retrial to the Special Deputy Collector, Kolaba for decision on the followingWhether the appellants prove that they are the proprietors of the lands in the village of Kotheri or in the lands attached as a reserved forest to the said village;(2) Whether the appellants are entitled to any compensation for the village gaothan lands or lands under the rivers and nalls. This claim is based on the allegation of the appellants that they are the proprietors of the village;(3) Whether the appellants are entitled, as a customary incident of the Khoti, to a share in the forest revenues of the village;(4) What is the market value of the loss or such share of right, if any, in the gaothan and river and nalla lands.We affirm the above order of remand and further direct that an opportunity should be given by the Special Deputy Collector to both sides to adduce such evidence as they choose on these points. After taking such evidence the Special Deputy Collector will pronounce the award in the light of the law laid down in this judgment.