When Trust is not entitled to claim exemption U/S 129(b) of Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act?

 There is neither any finding nor evidence on record to
show that the lands in question were purchased either by the
Private Trust or by the Public Trust or that there existed any such
Deed of Settlement of Trust on or before the tillers' day,

i.e. 1-4-1961;
on the contrary, it is urged by Shri Deshpande, the
learned counsel for the respondent No.1, that the saledeeds
in
respect of the said lands stand in the names of the individuals. In
view of this, even if it is assumed that the Trust need not have
been registered on or before 1-4-1961,
the Trust was not entitled
to claim exemption under Section 129(b) of the Bombay Tenancy
and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act. 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Writ Petition No.1207 of 2000
 Shri Nathaji Mandir Sanstha,



Versus
 Vishnu s/o Kisan Pakade,


Coram : R.K. Deshpande, J.
Dated : 24 th April, 2014
Citation;2014(5) ALLMR 618

1. The petitioner is a Public Trust, registered under the
provisions of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 on 1531972.
It had defended the proceedings under Section 46 read with
Section 54 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands
(Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958 for fixation of price in respect of
the tenanted lands on the ground that the income from the said
property was being utilized for the purposes of the Trust, and
hence the applicability of Sections 46 and 54 was exempted by
virtue of the provision of Section 129(b) of the said Act.
Although the claim was accepted by the Tahsildar, the
SubDivisional
Officer has set aside the order of the Tahsildar,
which has been maintained by the Maharashtra Revenue

Tribunal. Hence, both these orders passed by the SubDivisional
Officer as well as by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal are
the subjectmatter
of challenge in this petition.
2. It is not disputed by the learned counsels appearing for
the parties that the Authorities below have concurrently held that
the income from the property is being utilized for the purposes of
the Trust. Such a finding of fact has not been challenged by any
of the parties before this Court.
3. Undisputedly, the Trust was registered on 1531972
and
hence relying upon the two decision of this Court – (i) in the case
of Gajanan Maharaj Sansthan, Shegaon v. Digambar s/o
Pandhari Bhise, reported in 2005(1) Mh.L.J. 1108; and (ii) in the
case of Maroti Sansthan, Tiwsa v. Gulab Haribhau Jirapure

(dead) and others, reported in 2006(6) Mh.L.J. 367, it is urged by
Shri Gilda, the learned counsel for the petitioners, that the
registration of the Trust under the Bombay Public Trusts Act on
the tillers' day, i.e. 141961,
was not necessary. What is required
to be shown is that the entire income of the Trust is being
appropriated for the purposes of the Trust. He submits that in
view of the findings of fact recorded by the Authorities below,
the registration of the Trust on 1531972
was of no consequence
and the Trust was entitled to exemption under Section 129(b) of
the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region)
Act.
4. Section 129(b) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural
Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958 being relevant, is reproduced
below :

“129. Exemption from certain provisions to lands
held by local authorities, Universities, trust, etc. Nothing
in the foregoing provisions except section 2, the
provision of Chapter II (excluding sections 21, 22, 23,
24 and 37) and section 91 and the provisions of
Chapters X and XII insofar as the provisions of the said
Chapters are applicable to any of the matters referred to
in sections mentioned above shall apply,(
a) .....
(b) to lands which are the property of a trust for an
educational purpose, hospital, panjarpole, Gaushala, or
an institution for public religious worship, provided the
entire income of such lands is appropriated for the
purposes of such trust; and
(c) .....
(d) .....
Explanation.For
the purpose of clause (b), a
certificate granted by the collector after holding any
inquiry, that the conditions mentioned in the said clause
are satisfied by the trust shall be the conclusive evidence
in that behalf.”

In view of the aforesaid provision, what is required to be
established is that – (i) the lands in question are the property of
the Trust for an educational purpose, hospital, panjarpole,
Gaushala, or an institution for public religious worship and
(ii) the entire income of such lands is appropriated for the
purposes of such Trust. The existence of a Trust holding a
property on the tillers' day, i.e. 141961,
is the essential
condition and in the absence of such finding, the question of
utilizing the income for the purposes of the Trust is of no
consequence.
5. There is neither any finding nor evidence on record to
show that the lands in question were purchased either by the
Private Trust or by the Public Trust or that there existed any such
Deed of Settlement of Trust on or before the tillers' day,

i.e. 1-4-1961;
on the contrary, it is urged by Shri Deshpande, the
learned counsel for the respondent No.1, that the saledeeds
in
respect of the said lands stand in the names of the individuals. In
view of this, even if it is assumed that the Trust need not have
been registered on or before 1-4-1961,
the Trust was not entitled
to claim exemption under Section 129(b) of the Bombay Tenancy
and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act. The decisions
relied upon by Shri Gilda for the petitioners does not deal with
the question whether the lands in question belonged to any such
Trust, which was created on or before the tillers' day, i.e.
141961.
In view of this, the said decisions are not applicable to
the present case.
6. In view of above, there is no substance in this petition.

The same is dismissed. Rule stands discharged. No order as to
costs.

Print Page