The said Act was enacted with the object of improvement of the land revenue administration and for ultimately putting an end to the Girasdari system and to regulate the relations between the Girasdars and their tenants.
The Tribunal agreed in principle with the Deputy Collector that the Girasdars were entitled to separate allotments both from the estate held jointly by them and also to separate allotments from the estates separately held by them.
From the Judgment and Order dated 15.1.1970 of the Gujarat High Court in Special Civil Application Nos.
305,368, 526, 384 and 495 of 1962.
He held that some of these Girasdars had separate or swang lands and were entitled to separate allotments from swang lands out of their swang estate.
This decision was assailed by way of a Special Civil Application before the Gujarat High Court.
They have numberinterest in the result of these appeals but they are represented by companynsel before us.
1 to 3 are statutory authorities, namely, the Mahalkari, Kutiana, Deputy Collector of Porbandar Division and the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal respectively.
8 to 10 of 1972.
However, as found by the Tribunal, one Girasdar, Ali Khokhar, had handed over possession of 15 acres of land of the joint estate and hence, on the footing of the joint holding the Girasdars were entitled to the balance area of 45 acres.
Respondents Nos.
In all, five petitions were filed by tenants challenging the decision of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
U. Mehta, U.A. Rana and K.L. Hathi for the Appellants.
One Respondent No.
There was a revision application preferred to the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal from the decision of the Deputy Collector.
9 is a Girasdar who is represented by the Assistant Custodian of Evacuee property and the rest of the respondents are the remaining Girasdars from whom the appellants held lands on leases.
2, modified the allotment made under the order of Mahalkari.
The appellants before us are the tenants of certain intermediary landlords known as Girasdars.
A. Shah and M.N. Shroff for the Respondents.
The Girasdars preferred an appeal against the said decision and in that appeal, the Deputy Collector, Porbandar, respondent No.
The companytroversy raised in the appeal is very limited and hence, the relevant facts can be very briefly stated.
4 5 are the legal heirs of certain Girasdars from whom some of the appellants held lands on lease.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KANIA, J. These are appeals by special leave against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Gujarat High Court in Special Civil Applications Nos.
Respondents Nos.
305,368 and 526 of 1972.
