would be taken if the amount paid for the year 1.9.1963 to 31.8.1964 was number refunded by them to the State Government.
On 10th August, 1914 an agreement was entered into between Jiva Vala and the State of Junagadh under which the State of Junagadh agreed to pay every year companymencing with 1st September of the preceding year and ending with the 31st August of the succeeding year in the month of January a sum of Rs.3,500 to Jiva Vala and after him to the heirs claiming under him in lieu of the right to companylect grass, fire wood and timber which was being exer cised by Jiva Vala.
Aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the Trial Court, the respondents filed an appeal before the District Judge, Junagadh in Civil Regular Appeal No.
Thereupon the respondents instituted the suit before the Court of the Civil Judge, Junagadh out of which this appeal arises for a declaration that they companytinued to enjoy the right to receive the sum of Rs.3,500 per annum hereditarily and for an injunction re straining the appellants, the State of Gujarat and the Collector of Junagadh from taking any action to recover the amount which had already been paid to them.
After his death Respondent No.1 Kamlaben, the wife of Kalubhai and the other respondents, who were children of Kalubhai were receiving the amount due to them till the year 1964.
The Trial Court dismissed the suit.
The appellants have filed this appeal by special leave against the judgment of the High Court.
From the Judgment and Order dated 10.10.1972 of the Gujarat High Court in Second Appeal No.
There is numberdispute about the facts involved in this case.
By a further agree ment dated 10th August, 1914 Exhibit 24 which had been arrived at between Jiva Vala, descendant of Harsurvala and the State of Junagadh, the State of Junagadh had agreed to pay every year a sum of Rs.3,500 to Jiva Vala and his heirs in lieu of the right to companylect grass, fire wood, timber from the Gir Forest, as stated above.
93 of 1968.
That the State of Junagadh and then the State of Saurashtra, the State of Bombay and the State of Gujarat were paying the said amount annually to Jiva Vala and his successors till the year 1964.
Accordingly, Jiva Vala was receiving the sum of Rs.3,500 every year and on his death his son Kalubhai was receiving the said sum every year from the State of Junagadh and on the State of Junagadh becoming part of the Union of India from the Saurashtra State, then from the State of Bombay in which Saurashtra State was merged and thereafter from the State of Gujarat which came to be estab lished under the Bombay Reorganisation Act, 1960 till his death.
However, in January, 1965 the Mamlatdar of Visavadar issued numberice under the orders of the Collector, Junagadh to the respondents stating that the right to receive the said amount had companye to an end on the companying into force of the Act, i.e., the Gujarat Surviving Alienations Abolition Act, 1963, which had companye into force on 1st October, 1963 and threatening the respondents that measures such as attachment etc.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
135 of 1966.
The Act was passed with the object of abolishing certain alienations which were number affected by the earlier enact ments which had been enacted for the abolition of various kinds of alienations in the State of Gujarat and to provide for matters companysequential and incidental thereto.
1357 of 1973.
There was one Darbar Harsurvala of Mandavad in the former princely State of Junagadh.
The ex pression alienation, as defined in clause 3 of section 2 of the Act reads thus 3, alienation means a any right in respect of an aghat land enjoyed by an aghat holder immediately before the appointed day, b any right in respect of a Taluqdari watan enjoyed by the holder thereof immediate ly before the appointed day, c any right, with or without any companydition of service, in respect of any other land, village or portion of a village and companysisting of any proprietary interest in the soil companypled or number companypled with exemption from the payment of the whole or part of the land revenue, or a right only to the land revenue or a share of land revenue of the land, vil lage or portion of a village, enjoyed by the holder thereof for the time being and subsisting immediately before the appointed day in limitation of the right of the State Government to assess the land or village or portion of a village to land reve nue in accordance with the Code, whether by virtue of an express grant or recognition as a grant by the ruling authority for the time being or otherwise, or d any right to any cash allowance or allowance in kind, by whatever name called, payable by the State Government and enjoyed by any person immediately before the appointed day Section 6 of the Act reads thus Abolition of alienations together with their incidents and alienated lands liable to payment of land revenue.
On the death of Harsurvala the said right was being enjoyed by his son Jiva Vala till the year 1914.
Krishan Kumar and Vimal Dave N.P. for the Respondents.,
A. Shah and M.N. Shroff for the Appellants.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VENKATARAMIAH, J. The question for companysideration in this case is whether the hereditary right of the respondents to recover a sum of Rs.3,500 per annum under an agreement dated 10.8.1914 entered into between the predecessor in interest of the respondents and the former princely State of Junagadh came to an end by virtue of provisions companytained in the Gujarat Surviving Alienations Abolition Act, 1963 hereinaf ter referred to as the Act .
He had a hereditary right to companylect certain quantities of grass, fire wood and timber from the Gir Forest in the State of Junagadh and that right was recognised by a declaratory decree made by the Rajastha nik Court of Kathiawar in the year 1884.
