Remember | Register | Forgot Password?
Bookmark This Page   RSS Feeds  Follow On Twitter

 

Search for Lawyers          
    

Home > Experts > Property Law > Section 143 in up land reforms act



Please Wait ..

Section 143 in up land reforms act (Property Law)

Report Abuse
This query is : Resolved


Author : Sunil

Posted On 20 January 2012 at 23:21

Dear Experts,

Could you please help us in below situation:

1.Land has been converted from agri to Residential(143 approved)
2.Situated in Greater Noida Phase-2

Question:

1.Difference between 143 (privately converted land) and Authority alloted land?
2.what is the role of Greater noida authority in this land (any time in future)?


I shall appreciate your kind replies on this topic








Expert : Thangapandian

Posted On 21 January 2012 at 06:48

Section 143 of UP Zamindari abolition and Land
Reforms Act 1950
Use of holding for industrial or residential purpose
1 Where a Bhumidhar with transferable rights uses his holding or part thereof for
a purpose not connected with agriculture, horticulture or animal husbandry
which includes pisciculture and poultry farming, the Assistant Collector-incharge
of sub-division may, suo motu or on an application, after making such
enquiry as may be prescribed, make a declaration to that effect.
(1-A) Where declaration under sub-section (1) has to be made in respect of a
part of the holding, the Assistant Collector-in-charge of the sub-division may, in
the manner prescribed, demarcate such part for the purposes of such
declaration.
2 Upon the grant of the declaration mentioned in sub-section (1), the provision of
this Chapter (other than this section) shall cease to apply to the Bhumidhar with
transferable rights with respect to such land and he shall thereupon be
governed in the matter of devolution of the land by personal law to which he is
subject.
3 Where a bhumidhar with transferable rights has been granted, before or after
the commencement of the Uttar Pradesh Land Laws (Amendment) Act 1978,
any loan by the Uttar Pradesh Financial Corporation or by any other corporation
owned or controlled by the State Government, on the security of any land held
by such Bhumidhar, the provisions of this Chapter (other than this section) shall
cease to apply to such Bhumidhar with respect to such land and he shall
thereupon be governed in the matter of devolution of the land by personal law
to which he is subject.
SYNOPSIS
1. Legislative Changes 12. Residential Building
2. Summary 13. Land
3. Rules framed by the State
Government
14. Inquiry and demarcation of land
4. Application of this section to
Bhumidhar
15. Section 143 and reference
5. Jurisdiction of Consolidation
Courts on non-agricultural land
16. Section 143 and Section 191 -
difference
6. Declaration - Jurisdiction to grant
of
17. Application of Chapter X of the ZA Act
to land covered under Section 143.
7. Who can apply for declaration
18. Held used in Section 331-A, meaning
of
8. Devolution according to
declaration
19. procedure
9. Effect of declaration
20. Sub-sections (1), (2) and (3) - Scope
of
10. Purpose of Declaration 21. Industrial purpose
11. Devolution by personal law
1. Legislative changes - The original sub-section (1) was "(1) A bhumidhar,
who uses his holding or a part thereof for industrial or residential purposes, may
applyt to the Assistant Collector-in-charge of the sub-division for a declaration
to the effect, and the Assistant Collector-in-charge of the sub-division shall, on
being satisfied after making such enquiry as he may consider necessary, make
a declaration accordingly."
This sub-section was submitted by same sub-section and sub-section (1-A) was
added by Section 32 of the U.P.Amending Act,XXXVII of 1958.
In sub-section (1) by Section 33 of the U.P.Amending Act XVI of 1953 the
words "Assistant Collector-in-charge" of the sub-division" were substituted for "
Collector".
Words with transferable rights have been added after Bhumidhar wherever they
occur in sub-sections (1) and (2) by U.P.Act 24 of 1986.
By Section 2 of U.P.Land Laws (Amendment) Act (U.P. Act No.6 of 1978) the
sub-section (3) has been inserted.
2. Summary - Section 142 of the Act provides that a bhumidhar has the right to
use his land for any purpose whatsoever. This right is peculiar to a bhumidhar
alone. He can use his holding or part thereof for a purpose not connected with
agriculture, horticulture or animal husbandry etc., and instead may use it for
industrial or residential purpose. When the land is being used for such
purposes, the Assistant Collector-in-charge of the sub-division may, suo moto
or on an application, after making any inquiry make a declaration to that effect.
On result of such declaration is that such land ceases to be governed by the
provisions of this Act except by this section. Another consequence is that such
demarcated land is then in the matter of devolution governed by personal law to
which he is subject.
3. Rules framed by the State Government:
Rule 135 - (1) On an application made by a bhumidhar under Section 143 or on
facts coming to his notice otherwise, the Assistance Collector-in-charge of the
sub-divison may cause enquiry being made through the Tahsildar or any other
officer not below thye rank of a Supervisor Kanungo, for the purpose of
satisfying himself that the bhumidhar's holding or a part thereof is really being
used for a purpose not connected with agriculture, horticulture or animal
husbandry which includes pisciculture and poultry farming. The enquiry shall be
made on the spot and the enquiry officer shall, alongwith his report also furnish
information in the Performa given below:-
(2) Where the proceedings have been started by the Assistant Collector-incharge
of the Sub-division on his own motion he shall issue notice to the
Bhumidhar concerned. Otherwise also he shall give him an opportunity of being
heard before coming to a decision in the matter.
Area of
the
holding
used for
nonagricultural
purpose
Name
of
Village
Name of
Bhumidhar
with
parentage
and
residence
Khata
Kahatuni
number
Area of
the
holding
Land
Revenue
Plot
No.
(a)
Area
(b)
The
specific
nonagricultural
use to
which the
holding or
part
thereof is
put to
Remark
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
(3) Where the entire holding of the Bhumidhar has been put to use for a
purpose not connected with agriculture, horticulture or animal husbandry which
includes pisciculture and poultry farming., the Assistant Collector-in-charge of
the Sub-division may make a declaration to that effect.
(4) Where only part of the holding of the Bhumidhar has been put to use for a
purpose not connected with agriculture, horticulture or animal husbandry which
includes pisciculture and poultry farming the Assistant Collector-in-charge of the
Sub-division shall make a declaration to that effect accordingly and get the said
part demarcated on the basis of existing survey maps and actual user of the
land.
(5) The Assistant Collector-in-charge of the Sub-division shall get prepared and
placed on record a map showing in different colors the plots put to use for
purposes connected with agriculture, horticulture or animal husbandry which
includes pisciculture and poultry farming and for purposes not so connected. He
shall also apportion the land revenue payable for each part of holding. The land
revenue payable for each part shall bear the same proportion to the total land
revenue as the valuation of part bears to the total valuation of the holding
calculated on the basis of rent rates applicable. An entry shall also be ordered
to be made accordingly in the Khatauni.
(6) The cost of the demarcation shall be realized from the Bhumidhar
concerned as an arrear of land revenue unless it has been deposited during the
course of the proceedings. For the services of the Government servants
deputed for carrying out the demarcation the cost shall be calculated according
to the time taken in the work at the rates laid down in the paragraph 405 of the
Revenue Court Manual. The cost so calculated shall be deposited in the
treasury under the head "DII - Miscellaneous-9-Collection of payments of
services rendered".
4. Application of this section to Bhumidhar - It is the application of this
section and grant of declaration thereunder that a Bhumidhar gains two rights:
(1) to use their holding or part thereof for industrial or residential purposes; and
(2) of devolution of such demarcated land by personal law to which he is
subject.
It may be said that but for this section has the two rights granted by it would not
be consistent with the provisions of this Act.
It must be sound odd that when a Bhumidhari land is used for industrial or
residential purposes it would still remain Bhumidhari. It is Bhumidharu land and
it is because of Bhumidhari rights that the Bhumidhari can use it to such
purposes. The Bhumidhari rights will continue even if one Bhumidhar transfers
it by sale or in any other manner to another. It is also not necessary that the
Bhumidhar should use the land for industrial or residential purposes himself. He
may take a partner or let it out on lease. He may grant lease of it for building
purposes and the land will be governed by the provisions of the Transfer of
Property Act, in the matter of eviction of the tenant etc.
5. Jurisdiction of Consolidation Courts on non-agricultural land- Where
the area in question was being used for the purpose of making bricks, it was a
purpose unconnected with agriculture and such area did not come under the
term land and the Consolidation Courts would have no jurisdiction to adjudicate
upon the rights of the parties to such land. Triloki Nath v. Ram Gopal, 1974 RD
5. In such case the revenue or civil court will have jurisdiction.
6. Declaration - Jurisdiction to grant of- The question whether certain land
has ceased to be used for agricultural purposes is raised before a Civil Court it
is bound to refer the question to Revenue Court vide Section 331-A of U.P.Z.A.
& L.R. Act. Jurisdiction to grant a declaration under Section 143 vested
exclusively in Revenue Court. Magnu Ahir v. Mahabir, 1988 RD 301 (HC).
7. Who can apply for declaration- The order of declaration under Section 143
can be made only on the application of the Bhumidhar himself and not on the
application of any other person. Chandra Pal v. Hind Bricks Association, 1989
RD 402 (BR): 1989 RR 302 (BR).
8. Devolution according to declaration- It would have been an anomaly if a
Bhumidhar using the land as stated would also be governed by same provisions
of inheritance as one using the land to a purpose connected with agriculture
etc. There would be no rational differentia for the application of such provisions.
On the contrary, the use of Bhumidhar land for residential or industrial purposes
may be such land tied for a very long period. The change of lands may cause
embarrassment in determining the heirs of each deceased tenant. It has
therefore, been provided that personal law will apply to such holder of
Bhumidhari rights.
In spite of such provisions and possibilities of the land being under use for a
very long period it was not considered impossible that the land couold also
revert to its old use for agriculture and other purposes connected with
agriculture and Section 144 is enacted to govern the case when the land reverts
to agricultural purposes, etc.
9. Effect of declaration- It will appear from Section 143 that till such time that a
declaration is not granted under sub-section (2) the results set out in that subsection
do not follow. Until the declaration the Bhumidhar continues to be
governed by the provisions of this Act. In a suit by a Bhumidhar plaintiff for
ejectment of the defendant on ground of non-payment of rent for three years
instituted in the civil court an issue as to whether it was land within the meaning
of the term was referred to the Assistant Collector-in-charge of the Sub-
Division. It was held that the finding on such issue couild not amount to a
declaration under Section 143 and that while the land cease to be land the
Bhumidhar continued to be governed by the provisions of the Act until
declaration. Alauddin alias Makki v. Hamid Khan, 1971 RD 160 (HC). Another
poihnt is as to jurisdiction of the Civil Court. The revenue court has power to
evict a person from Bhumidhari land. And it is presumed to be land within the
meaning of the term as defined in Section 3 (14) of the Act. Jhanda etc. v.
Mithan Singh, 1969 RD 149.
10. Purpose of declaration- The country is fast moving towards mechanisation
and industrialisation and tenancy land is also intended to be machanised for
better yield and more profitable use. These section opens the tenancy land to
use it to any purpose. A Sirdar may also acquire Bhumidhari rights and put his
land to any purpose. The declaration granted under this section has the effect
of setting apart theland which is intended to be used for purposes other than
agriculture. The entire land or any p[ortion of it may be used for agriculture or
residential purpose. Here the use of the land has been classified as agricultural
and industrial purposes.
11. Devolution by personal law- Thought a Bhumidhar has been given power
to transfer and bequeath by will so long as the land is used for agricultural
purposes he is governed by the various provisions of this Act yet the order of
succession is governed by this Act. But when the land is used to a purpose
unconnected with agriculture and a declaration it sought under Section 143 of
the Act he has been granted by a privilege that the succession will be governed
by the personal; law applicable in this case. Such provision is made with a view
that the Bhumidhari land may be continued to be used as it had been for
industrial purposes. It may be that a portion of the holding is used for industrial
purposes and the remaining land for agricultural purposes. In respect of the
land used for agricultural purposes the land would be governed by the
provisions of this Act and for the area used for industrial purposes by personal
law. Such change in the matter of devolution of Bhumidhari land is found
necessary to ensure security to a Bhumidhar in the enjoyment of land directed
towards better utilisation of it in a developing country. It fills the tenant with no
recourse if he changes his mind and directs it to be used again for purposes
connected with agricultural and then the entire provisions of the Act become
applicable to the land. In truth such right to use the land to any purpose without
fear of losing it is one right of ownership.
The use of the land for baking bricks is a purpose unconnected with agriculture
and until a declaration under Section 143 is sought it is still land within the
definition of the term. See Allaudin alias Makki v. Hamid Khan, 1971 AWR 193.
A similar provision is found in the Consolidation of Holdings Act also because
the Act is intended to be self-contained and during consolidation operation no
other court has got the jurisdiction to decide matters exclusively within its
jurisdiction. Where the area is under consolidation operation, the tenure-holder
desiring the land to be used for non-agricultural purposes the tenure-holder
desiring the land to be used for non-agricultural purposes can only di so with
the permission of the Settlement Officer (Consolidation). Once such Officer
grants the permission the area will cease to be land within the meaning of the
term. The proviso to Section 5 clearly provides that an agricultural holding can
be used for agricultural purposes. Triloki Nath v. Rfam Gopal, 1974 RD 5.
There can be no dispute that a Bhu8midhar can use the land to any purpose
whatsoever and this does not depend on the grant of declaration under Section
1543 of Act 1 of 1951. Even without a declaration he can so use his land the
only difference it makes it that the devolution in that case will be governed by
the provisions of the Act. Allauddin alias Makki v Hamid Khan, 1971 AWR 193.
In a suit for declaration under Section 59 of the U.P. Tenancy Act it was found
that the land was taken for industrial purposes e.g., construction of houses and
setting up a flour mill and lime mill. It was held that it was not land and not
amenable to the jurisdiction of the revenue court. Phool Chand v. Jagannath
Pd., 1961 ALJ (Rev) 27.
Land let for planting grove was not land under the U.P. Tenancy Act. Therefore
the plaintiff could not acquire hereditary rights in it. The facts of the case were
that the land was primarily given for building a house or shop, pucca or kachcha
or for planting grove or for sinking well. Thus the land given being to be used for
any purpose it was not land. Jagannath Pd. v. (Smt.) Chunki, 1959 ALJ (Rev)
73.
12. Residential building- The expression residential building implies any
building which is non-residential building. A non-residential building is that
which is used solely for the purpose of business or trade. (Smt.) Narayan Kuer
v. Dr. Sri Ram Joshi, 1969 RCJ 652. A bhumidhar has got a right to build
houses on his land or he may let the land for construction so that a construction
may be raised by a lease with consent of the bhumidhar or terms as may be
agreed upon. Krishnapasuda v. Dattaraya, AIR 1966 SC 1024.
Structure involves something permanent. It is made for use as a residential
building or for industrial purposes. The minimum thing to make an open land a
building in any roofed structure. Mohd. Sami v. Savitri Devi 1957 ALJ 435. A
shop without roof is not building . Paltandin v. Sardar Karam Singh, 1967 ALJ
395. A brick-kiln is not a building. Newand Ram v. Gaon Samaj, 1961 RD 299,
overuling Debi Pd. v Ghanshyam Das, 1961 ALJ 193: 1961 RD 366; See
Ghanshyam Das v. Debi Pd., 1966 RD 310 (SC).
The purpose of residence is different from the industrial purpose. To make it
residential the premises must be meant as a place of dwelling which term
includes the normal activities of life like sleeping, cooking and feeding. In the
case of a non-residential building, the predominant or dominant user of the
building is the deciding factor to determine its character.
The question again is not even a building but the user of the land hitherto used
as tenancy land. It is conveivable that an open land with a tin shed may be used
for industrial purpose. Business of manufacturing camphor, Nagamanickam
Chettiar v. Nallakammu Servat (1957) 1 MLJ 182, conversion of logs of wood
into beams, planks etc., Abdul Gafoor v. Mushir Ali Khan, 1969 ALJ 724,
husking of rice, Zahur Ahmad Abdul Sattar v. State of U.P., AIR 1965 All 326:
1965 ALJ 375, the grinding of wheat into flour, Bihari Lal v. (Smt.) Chandrawati,
AIR 1966 All 541: 1966 ALJ 368, and turning cotton sheets into articles of
hosiery. Jayanti Hosiery Mills v. Upendra Chandra Das, AIR 1916 Cal 317:59
CWN 741, are some of the instances of manufacturing of articles.
13. Land- Land does not cease to be agricultural, so long as it is held or
occupied for the purposes of Agriculture, and even if a Bhumidhar raises
constructions on the land held by him as such, it cannot be said that the
provisions of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act cease to have an application thereto. A
Bhumidhar could use land for any purpose other than agriculture, but so long a
declaration under Section 143 is not obtained by him, it continues to be
governed by the provisions of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. He could not make a
transfer of the land or deal with it otherwise on the ground that land has become
Abadi and he could deal with it in any manner he liked. Mangu Ahir v. Mahabir,
1988 RD 301 (HC).
14. Inquiry and demarcation of land- Under Rule 136 an inquiry is made
either on the application of the bhumidhar or on the facts coming to the
knowledge of the Assistant Collector-in-charge of the sub-division, suo motu the
inquiry may be made by Tahsildar who has to send his report alongwith
particulars in the proforma prescribed. The Sub-Divisional Officer then grants a
declaration.
Under Rule 136 an enquiry into the allegations is made by the Sub-divisional
Officer-in-charge of the sub-division in the application or suo moto or he may
send the same to the Tehsildar for enquiry and report.
An application was made under Section 143 that the plots in question were not
connected with any agricultural purposes. The application was dismissed by the
Assistant Collector-in-charge of the sub-division. The learned Collector in
appeal upheld the finding. A revision was filed before the learned Additional
Commissioner. He observed that for declaration under Section 143,it is not
necessary to determine who was the bhumidhar of the disputed land. It was
held that the learned Additional Commissioner was correct and the trial court
failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it by law. Hirday Narain v. Ram
Kishore, 1976 AWC (Rev) 84: 1976 RD 265.
A bhumidhar can use the land to any purpose and where an application is made
to the effect that the land is being used to a purpose inconsistent wi9th the
purpose for which it is let he is not liable to ejectment. He is not liable to
ejectment if there is no transfer. Only the land may be demarcated i9f the whole
or any part thereof ce4ases to be agricultural land.
It is land even though Section 143 applies. Pratap Rai v. Board of Revenue,
1980 Rd 322.
15. Section 143 and reference- Where a suit was filed for declaration of cotenancy
rights and it was decided without framing issues as to the land ever
being raised under Section 143 a reference was accepted. Ramesh Chandra
Singh v. Sukhendra Singh, 198u1 RD 53.
16. Section 143 & Section 191- Difference- The extinction of Bhumidhari
rights under Section 191 are different from non-applicability of the Act to any
land. Pratap Rai v. Board of Revenue, 1980 RD 322 (HC).
17. Application of Chapter X of the Z.A. Act to land covered under Section
143- Chapter X of Z.A. Act deals with land revenue. It applies to land held by a
person who is or is deemed to be Bhumidhar. it does not apply to a person who
is not Bhumidhar or the land is such which doe not come within the definition of
sub-section (14) of Section 2. A person who obtains loan from corporations
described under sub-section (3) or declaration granted in his favour under
preceding two sub-section ceases to be Bhumidhar and the land is also not
land for purposes of Z.A. Act therefore, provision for recovery of land under
Chapter X cannot be applied for recovery of loan. Pratap Rai v. Board of
Revenue, 1980 RD 322 (HC).
18. 'Held' used in Section 331-A-Meaning of - In Section 331-A the word held
is used in the same sense that it refers to title that had been legal and original.
It was so held in Budhan Singh v. Nabi Bux, 1961 Rd 22-0 (SC).
19. Procedure - An application under this section governed by the provisions of
Serial No.11 of Schedule II and Serial No.15 of Appendix III of the Rules.
Forum - Assistant Collector-in-charge of Sub-Division.
Court fee - One rupee
Limitation - Three years from the commencement of the user
Appeal - First appeal will lie to the Collector under Section 331 (3) but no
second appeal.
Revision - A revision will lie to the Board under Section 333.
20. Sub-sections (1), (2) and (3) - Scope of - under the other two sub-sections
if any land is used for industrial purpose and a declaration is granted by the
Assistant Collector thus provisions of Chapter VIII cease to apply and
succession to it is governed by personal law and land falls beyond the purview
of Z.A. Act. The result is the same in respect of land under sub-section (3) on
loan taken on it. No declaration is required as in preceding sub-sections. A
person who takes the loan ceases to be bhumidhar who obtain loan from
Financial Corporation or by any other corporation owned or controlled by the
State Government ceases to be Bhumidhar and land is not land for purposes of
Z.A. Act. Pratap Rai v Board of Revenue, 1980 Rd 122 (HC).
21. Industrial purpose - The words "industrial purpose" have not been defined
anywhere in the Act but they are taken in a sense opposed to agricultural
purpose. Fpor the land used for industrial purposes at least one thing is
established. If the object of using the land is to raise agricultural produce it willo
tantamount to a purpose connected with agriculture. The use does not change
the object of the user of the land which was used for an agricultural purpose.
The circumstances that the ultimate produce is not being consumed by human
beings or beasts but by a factory is irrelevant for determining the purpose for
which the land is being used. Kesar Sugar Works Ltd, v. State of U.P., 1967 RD
157.
In Commissioner of Income Tax v. B.K.S. Roy, AIR 1957 SC 768, it was held
that the term agriculture cannot be confined merely to production of grain and
food products meant for human beings and beast but must be understood as
comprising all products of land which have some utility either for consumption
or for trade and commerce.

"I DOWNLOAD IT FROM OUR EXPERT SHAH'S FILES"

-tom-



Expert : Thangapandian

Posted On 21 January 2012 at 06:49

since your query about your local law i can do this only for you.

better you can take help of your local advocate.

-tom-



Expert : Shailesh Kr. Shah

Posted On 21 January 2012 at 07:50

Even, after conversion of section 143, Land use would be apply in accordance with UP urban development and planning act, 1973.

please clear/describe query more to get reply accordingly.



Expert : Thangapandian

Posted On 21 January 2012 at 08:13

shailesh sir., i got this file from you only sir.. can you remember it?

this credit to you only..


-tom-



Expert : Shailesh Kr. Shah

Posted On 21 January 2012 at 08:42

Yes, Mr.Tom, I have uploaded said file.



Expert : raj kumar makkad

Posted On 21 January 2012 at 09:43

Nothing left to be added in the downloaded by tom and uploaded by shah's file.



Expert : prabhakar singh

Posted On 21 January 2012 at 11:00

Truly said by Mr. Makkad and rightly done by M/S Shah and TOM



Author : Sunil

Posted On 21 January 2012 at 12:53

Dear Experts

Many thanks for your reply here

However, the files shared here is more of complicated one for a layman like me.

This land is available at 7000/-SqYd
While the land acquired/developed/alloted by GNIDA is 25000-40000/-SqYd in nearby areas

the Question here is that, does the authority have any right(acquisition or like) on this land which got 143 done successfully in 2007?

Am i safe in buying this land for investment/residential purpose?

Attached is the 143 declaration issued by SDM for your reference.



Expert : raj kumar makkad

Posted On 21 January 2012 at 20:10

In the given facts, you can invest in the the project as the authority is well within its inherent power to acquire the land.



Expert : Thangapandian

Posted On 22 January 2012 at 11:36

thank you makkad sir., and prabhakar sir..

-tom-



Expert : prabhakar singh

Posted On 22 January 2012 at 14:08

The land has been declared now as non agricultural.Invest can be made but nothing can be predicted about any acquisition policy of state.



Expert : Shailesh Kr. Shah

Posted On 24 January 2012 at 09:00

the Question here is that, does the authority have any right(acquisition or like) on this land which got 143 done successfully in 2007?

Answer: There is no exemption for 143 land for not acquisition.



Author : Sunil

Posted On 24 January 2012 at 21:44

Many Thanks Shailesh Ji...!!!
&
All the experts here.

Would appreciate if you could put some more light on compensation to be paid in time of any such acquisition happened in future?

would it be at the negotiated rate according to residential plots or at the agriculture rate?

Thanks again to all

regards
Sunil



Expert : Shailesh Kr. Shah

Posted On 28 January 2012 at 18:25

Dear Mr.Sunil,

Its totally depends upon current circumstances of that event, we can forecast here. However, it is to be noted that merely converting land to residential, you can't claim as residential plots rate.


Previous

Next

You need to be the querist or approved Lawyersclubindia expert to take part in this query .


Click here to login ( Members Login ) now







Similar Queries :










Quick Links



Browse By Category



Subscribe to Experts Feed
Enter your email to receive Experts Updates: