Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 – ss.2(g)(3) and 2(g)(5)(v) – Whether the word ‘shamilat’ has to be read with taraf, patti, pannas, and tholas or only with taraf in subclause (v) of clause (5) of s.2(g) – Held: The definition of ‘shamilat deh’ in s.2(g) of the Act includes all lands described as ‘shamilat deh’ or charand excluding abadi land – In clause (3) of s.2(g), there is a comma after the word ‘shamilat’ whereas such comma is missing in sub-clause (v) of clause (5) of s.2(g) – There seems to be an error rather than a deliberate non-use of the comma – This is because clause (3) provides that land described as ‘shamilat’, ‘tarafs’, ‘patties’ ‘pannas’ and ‘tholas’, are to be treated as ‘shamilat deh’ land only if they are used for the common purpose of the village – This clearly implies that if the land described as ‘shamilat’, ‘taraf ’, ‘patti’, ‘panna’ and ‘thola’ were not being used for the common purpose, it would not fall within the meaning of ‘shamilat deh’ – Clause (v) is the negative portion of the definition which provides that certain lands will not be treated as ‘shamilat deh’ and these are those land which have been described as ‘shamilat’, ‘taraf’, ‘patti’, ‘panna’ and ‘thola’ in the revenue record and not used according to the revenue record for the benefit of the village community or a part thereof or for the common purpose of the village – The absence of the comma after the word ‘shamilat’ is not of any great significance – In fact, it appears that the comma has been left out by mistake and in fact a comma should be read after ‘shamilat’ and before ‘taraf ’ in the latter part of the section also – The word ‘shamilat’ has to be read with all four- ‘taraf ’, ‘patti’, ‘panna’ and ‘thola’ – A land can be ‘shamilat deh’ only if it is ‘shamilat taraf ’, ‘shamilat patti’, ‘shamilat panna’, or ‘shamilat thola’ – In case the word shamilat is missing from any of these four terms, then the land cannot be said to be belonging to a group of people and could never become ‘shamilat deh’ land.
Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 – s.2(g) – Whether land in occupation of appellant is ‘shamilat deh’ land and vests in the village common body – Held: In the revenue records, the land was shown as ‘Shamlat Patti Dhera & Khubi’ – ‘Dhera & Khubi’ were the ancestors of the appellant – The possession is shown as that of proprietors/self-cultivators and an entry was made in favour of the Panchayat Deh in 1987-1988 – The land was always shown to be ‘Shamlat Patti Dhera & Khubi’ and in the cultivation of the appellant or his ancestors – Moreover, the land was never shown to be used for the benefit of the entire village community or even for a part of the community – The land cannot be described as ‘Shamilat Deh’ and, therefore, would not vest in the village proprietary body – The name of the appellant be entered in the column of ownership with the entry ‘shamlat patti’.
Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 – ‘shamilat deh’ land – Meaning of – Held: The word ‘shamilat’ basically means ‘held in joint possession and undivided lands which are part and parcel of a village’ – When these lands are held commonly by a village proprietary body, they are described as ‘shamilat deh’ land.
Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 – ‘taraf’, ‘patti’, ‘panna’ and ‘thola’ – Meaning of – Held: ‘Taraf ’, ‘patti’, ‘panna’ and ‘thola’ are different terms but have a common strain or similarity running through them – These descriptions are of land of a group of villagers based on clan, caste, sect, area, etc. – In British India, the village was divided into different pattis/sections based upon caste, religion, occupation, etc. of the persons residing in the village – Patti is described as division of land into separate portions or strips in a village – These locations are known as pattis – Patti is basically, therefore, a small division of the village – The terms ‘taraf ’, ‘panna’ and ‘thola’ may be different but are akin to patti and also deal with community of villagers residing separately – Therefore, they have virtually the same meaning – It is also apparent that a patti can normally be created out of the shamilat land only when a group of people enjoy some portion of the land out of the bigger common shareholding that is a patti. Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. The word ‘shamilat’ basically means ‘held in joint possession and undivided lands which are part and parcel of a village’. When these lands are held commonly by a village proprietary body, they are described as ‘shamilat deh’ land. ‘Taraf’, ‘patti’, ‘panna’ and ‘thola’ are different terms but have a common strain or similarity running through them. These descriptions are of land of a group of villagers based on clan, caste, sect, area, etc. In British India, the village was divided into different pattis/sections based upon caste, religion, occupation, etc. of the persons residing in the village. Patti is described as division of land into separate portions or strips in a village. These locations are known as pattis. Patti is basically, therefore, a small division of the village. The terms ‘taraf’, ‘panna’ and ‘thola’ may be different but are akin to patti and also deal with community of villagers residing separately. Therefore, they have virtually the same meaning. [Paras 8, 9][1203-G-H; 1204-A-C]
2. If it is accepted that there is virtually no difference between ‘taraf ’, ‘patti’, ‘panna’ and ‘thola’ then the task of interpretation becomes much easier. It is also apparent that a patti can normally be created out of the shamilat land only when a group of people enjoy some portion of the land out of the bigger common shareholding that is a patti. The definition of ‘shamilat deh’ in Section 2(g) of the Act includes all lands described as ‘shamilat deh’ or charand excluding abadi land. In clause (3) of Section 2(g) there is a comma after the word ‘shamilat’ whereas such comma is missing in sub-clause (v) of clause (5) of Section 2(g). There seems to be an error rather than a deliberate nonuse of the comma. This is because because clause (3) provides that land described as ‘shamilat’, ‘tarafs’, ‘patties’ ‘pannas’ and ‘tholas’, are to be treated as ‘shamilat deh’ land only if they are used for the common purpose of the village. This clearly implies that if the land described as ‘shamilat’, ‘taraf’, ‘patti’, ‘panna’ and ‘thola’ were not being used for the common purpose, it would not fall within the meaning of ‘shamilat deh’. [Para 10][1204-CF]
3. Clause (v) is the negative portion of the definition which provides that certain lands will not be treated as ‘shamilat deh’ and these are those land which have described as ‘shamilat’, ‘taraf’, ‘patti’, ‘panna’ and ‘thola’ in the revenue record and not used according to the revenue record for the benefit of the village community or a part thereof or for the common purpose of the village. The absence of the comma after the word ‘shamilat’ is not of any great significance. In fact, it appears that the comma has been left out by mistake. In various publications, there is a comma between the words ‘shamilat’ and ‘taraf’. However, there is no comma in the official publication in the Gazette notification. It appears that the absence of a comma is a mistake and in fact a comma should be read after ‘shamilat’ and before ‘taraf’ in the latter part of the section also. The word ‘shamilat’ has to be read with all four- ‘taraf’, ‘patti’, ‘panna’ and ‘thola’. A land can be ‘shamilat deh’ only if it is ‘shamilat taraf’, ‘shamilat patti’, ‘shamilat panna’, or ‘shamilat thola’. In case the word shamilat is missing from any of these four terms, then the land cannot be said to be belonging to a group of people and could never become ‘shamilat deh’ land. [Para 11][1204-G-H; 1205-A-B]
4. The purpose of the section which defines ‘shamilat deh’ is that the land described as ‘shamilat’, ‘taraf’, ‘patti’, ‘panna’ and ‘thola’ not used for the benefit of the village community will not be treated as ‘shamilat deh’. Clause (3) of Section 2(g) is identical. The purpose is that the land which is described in revenue records as ‘shamilat’, ‘taraf’, ‘patti’, ‘panna’ and ‘thola’ and used for the benefit of the entire village community or a part thereof only would vest in the village proprietary body. The words ‘part thereof’ have been used with a specific purpose in the background of the meaning of patti. Even if the land is being utilised for the common purpose of the inhabitants of that ‘taraf’, ‘patti’, ‘panna’ and ‘thola’, it would be ‘shamilat deh’ even if it is not used for the benefit of the entire village. However, if the land is not used either for the benefit of the entire village or for the part of the village community which comprises the patti then the land, cannot be said to be ‘shamilat deh’ land within the meaning of Section 2(g). From the revenue records produced, the land has been shown as ‘Shamlat Patti Dhera & Khubi’. ‘Dhera & Khubi’ are the ancestors of the appellant(s). The possession is shown as that of proprietors/self-cultivators and an entry was made in favour of the Panchayat Deh in 1987-1988. The land was always shown to be ‘Shamlat Patti Dhera & Khubi’ and in the cultivation of the appellant(s) or his ancestors. Moreover, the land was never shown to be used for the benefit of the entire village community or even for a part of the community. The land cannot be described as ‘Shamilat Deh’ and, therefore, would not vest in the village proprietary body. The name of the appellant(s) should be entered in the column of ownership with the entry ‘shamlat patti’.[Paras 12-14][1205-C-H; 1206-A]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.