While directing that pattas be issued to the service holders such grant was made subject to the provisions of Section 21 of the Act.
After holding the necessary inquiry, he directed the grant of ryotwari pattas with reference to the lands companyprised in each inam title deed under Section 8 2 of the Act by treating the lands as Iruwaram Minor Inams granted for the performance of services companynected with the Devasthanam, first respondent herein.
He ordered that pattas be issued to the service holders under Section 8 2 ii of the Act holding that Section 8 2 i was number applicable as there was numberalienation in respect of these lands.
It was further held that the first respondent Shri Patteswaraswami Devastbanatn, hereinafter referred to as the Devasthanam, alone was the grantee of the inam.
Aggrieved by these orders both the service holders and the Devasthanam preferred appeals before the Tribunal questioning the companyrectness of the orders of the Settlement Tuhsildar.
These were known as Manyams.
The brief facts of the case are as follows The Settlement Tehsildar II, Gobichettipalayam initiated suo motu proceedings under the provisions of the Madras Minor Inams Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwaii Act, 1963 Act XXX of 1963 hereinafter referred to as the Act, in respect of the issue of ryotwari patta in respect of Service inams in Perur village.
The word came into use after the Muhammadan companyquest.
In the latter case, they would be obliged to establish the link between them and the original grantee if the grant was to the individual.
Civil Appeals 1914/82 and 1994/79 are directed against the judgment of the High Court dated 29.8.1978 which followed the earlier judgment dated 13.4.1978.
When similar appeals came before the High Court, following this judgment, the High Court by its order dated 29.8,1978 allowed the appeal of Devasthanam, the first respondent herein.
In ancient days, grants of land, or revenue, were made by Hindu sovereigns to individuals, particular families or companymunities for various purposes or to religious institutions lor their upkeep.
Aggrieved by this judgment several Special Tribunal Appeals STA under Section 30 of the Act were preferred to the High Court.
1995 to 2021 of 1979 and 1953 59/81 are directed against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court dated 13.4.1978 by which the High Court set aside the companyclusion arrived at by the Tribunal that the appellants, before us, were service holders and that they would be entitled to ryotwari pattas.
Mohan, J. All these appeals can dealt with under a companymon judgment since Civil Appeal Nos.
