Escheat of hereditary tenure: vacant inheritance passed to the Crown, not back to the zemindar.

An absolute and hereditary mokurreree tenure carved out of a zemindary was treated as an alienable interest, and in the absence of any grant term providing for determination in favour of the zemindar on failure of heirs, the superior title did not revert to the zemindar. The principle applied was that a vacant inheritance without a better claimant passes to the Crown by escheat under the general prerogative, subject to any valid trusts or charges. English feudal notions of reversion in favour of a Hindu zemindar were held inapplicable, and no authority supported such a right in the zemindar.

---

---

Issues: Whether, on the failure of heirs of the original grantee of an absolute and hereditary mokurreree tenure carved out of a zemindary, the superior title to the tenure reverted to the zemindar or vested in the Crown by escheat.

Analysis: The tenure was treated as an absolute and alienable interest, with no provision in the grant showing that it would determine in favour of the zemindar on failure of heirs. The principle recognised in earlier authority was that, where there is a vacant inheritance and no better title is shown, the Crown takes by escheat under the general prerogative, subject to any valid trusts or charges. English feudal notions of escheat or reversion in favour of a Hindu zemindar were held inapplicable, and no authority supported attributing such a right to the zemindar.

Conclusion: The superior title was held to be in the Crown and not in the zemindar or his representatives; the appeal was dismissed with costs.

---