In Brief
A landowner challenged revenue authorities' reclassification of his ancestral land as village common land ('shamilat deh'). The appellant's family had possessed the land for over a century as a separate parcel ('shamlat patti') without it being used for common village purposes. The Supreme Court held that land described as 'shamilat patti' does not fall within 'shamilat deh' unless used for the village community's benefit. The word 'shamilat' must qualify all four terms ('taraf', 'patti', 'panna', 'thola') in the statutory definition. Since the appellant's land was never used communally, it could not vest in the village body. The appeal was allowed and the appellant's ownership restored.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.