Part village inam estate classification failed to treat collateral records as proof of acreage-only grant

Whether the lands constituted a part village inam estate or a minor inam turned on whether the original grant was expressed only in acreage or cawnies, which would attract the exclusion in Explanation 1(b) to section 2(11) of the 1963 Act. As the original grant was not produced, the Court examined collateral material but found that paimash accounts and later surveys did not prove that the grant itself was described only by extent. The descriptions as Mela Thattimal Padugai and Kizha Thattimal Padugai, together with the finding that they formed parts of two villages, supported treatment as a part village inam estate. The lands were therefore not a minor inam, and the notification under the Minor Inams Act was invalid.

---

---

Issues: Whether the lands in Aryapuram Thattimal Padugai were a part village inam estate under the Madras Inams Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1963, or a minor inam under the Tamil Nadu Minor Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1963.

Analysis: The decisive inquiry was whether the grant was expressed only in terms of acreage or cawnies, because only then would the exclusion in Explanation 1(b) to section 2(11) of the 1963 Act apply. The original grant was not produced, so the matter had to be decided on the available collateral material. The Court held that the references to paimash accounts and later surveys did not establish that the grant itself was made in acreage terms, and those materials were insufficient to show that the subject-matter of the grant was described only by extent. The descriptions as Mela Thattimal Padugai and Kizha Thattimal Padugai, and the finding that they were parts of two different villages at the relevant time, supported the conclusion that the grant was of a part of villages and therefore fell within the definition of part village inam estate. The concurrent factual findings that the grant was not proved to be only in acreage terms were found to be sound.

Conclusion: The lands were held to be a part village inam estate and not a minor inam. The notification under the Tamil Nadu Minor Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1963 was invalid, and the appeals were dismissed.

---