Assignment

Name & Id:

1. Israt Jahan Akhi (1820281

Course: Land law (law315)

Section: 01
Instructor: Dr. Arif Jamil
Department of Law
Independent university
A) We may see from the facts and circumstances that SA documents reveal 200 bighas of land
instead of 500 bighas of land designated as 'Shikosti.' The presumption of accuracy applicable
to CS khatiyan under the Bengal Tenancy Act does not apply to state Acquisition khatiyan.
Although, according to Section 19(3) of the State Acquisition and Tenancy Act, the SA records
do not give compelling evidence of title, they do provide clear evidence of their production and
amendment. The tax officer shall provide a certificate indicating the fact of such final
publication and the date thereof once the record-of-rights has been finally published in
accordance with the provisions of sub-section 3 of section 19.
It's worth noting that even if there's a mistake in the SA record-of-rights or an omission from
the record-of-rights, and the objection and appeal periods have passed, the record-of-rights can
still be amended. If it is possible to do so by filing a declaratory suit under Section 42 of the
Specific Relief Act and other having decree in favor of the declaratory suit, the tax authority can
repair the record-of-rights by virtue of the decree of civil contract.
As a result, M has a possibility of winning about 1/5 of the property because the court can trace
the line of ownership back to the CS khatiyan.

B) There are certain lands which can be retained by the tenants beyond the prescribed limit of
lands:
1) Lands owned for large-scale agricultural on a cooperative basis or otherwise using power-
driven mechanic equipment, or for large-scale dairy farming[sec.20(4)].
2) Lands owned by the corporation for the cultivation and manufacture of tea or coffee, or for
the cultivation of rubber [section 20(4A)].
3) Lands owned by the firm for the growth of sugarcane for the purpose of sugar production
[section 20(4A)].
4) Lands covered by buildings or structures and their essential adjuncts utilized for large-scale
industrial, as well as other lands used for cultivating raw materials [sec. 20(5) I (b)]
5) Lands under debutter, waqf, waqf-al-al-aulad, or any other trust only for religious or
charitable purposes, with no reserve of economic gain for any individual [sec 20(5)]. (i)
C) Yes, M's possession of 500 bigha violates current land regulations. When it comes to the
maximum amount of retainable land, modifications to the current land legislation have
occurred four times since the passage of the SAT Act in 1950. Initially, it was 100 standard
bighas in 1950, then it was increased to 375 bighas in 1961, then down to 100 bighas in 1972,
and eventually to 60 bighas in 1984, and this provision of 60 standard bighas is still in use today.
Non-agriculture land can be purchased in excess of sixty standard bighas under the provisions
of the Land Reform Ordinance of 1984. If a malik obtains land in violation of the rule, the area
of land in excess of sixty standard bighas is forfeited to the government.
Section 20(2a) of the Act specifies that any land consisting of forest cannot be retained, while
section 84 of the Act allows for devolution of holding on the death of a raiyat.
So, if m's claim for 500 bighas land is true, the public prosecutor's case is correct.

D) Few laws back up M's claim. In Hasemuddin v. Bangladesh, the revisional settlement record-
of-rights is the latest record-of-rights, and in the event of a disagreement between the old
record-of-rights and the latest record-of-rights, the latest record-of-rights should prevail.
Looking at the facts, we can see that m's father T was the owner of the 500 bighas, according to
CS khatiyan. The first systematic and legislative record of rights was produced under the rules
of the Bengal Tenancy Act, 1885 or the Sylhet Tenancy Act, 1936, as CS khatiyan. The State
Acquisition and Tenancy Act of 1950 fundamentally altered the concept of title. Section 82(8) of
the Act deemed them to be malik. It kept the chain of continuation with the previous CS
khatiyan where it was held. According to Section 83 of the Act, a raiyat has the right to occupy
and utilize the land included in his holding in any way he sees fit.
If we look into the section 42 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877, when the plaintiff has right to any
property by right is present as per law not by contract. So, if there any remains any wrong entry
in the SA record-of-rights from the record-of-rights and the objection period and appeal period
is over long ago, still then the record-of-rights can be corrected. But it has limitation in 1950, in
1961, in 1972 and in 1984, lands in excess of maximum retainable quantity were duly acquired
withing a period of prescribed limit. But the lands in excess of 60 bighas have not been
acquired. So, at present legally two types ceiling of land prevail in Bangladesh: one, ownership
of 100 bighas made in the 1972 still in existence, because 40 bighas, in excess of 60 bighas,
have not been exceed 60 bighas under the prevailing provision of land reforms ordinance 1984.
Therefore, ownership of 100 bighas safely and lawfully runs in Bangladesh. So, M can claim for
title for 100 bighas according to the ordinance of 1972.
We may conclude from the above discussion that a few laws support her assertions, but not all
laws support her claims.