JUDGMENT

BHAGWATI, J.:— This appeal by certificate is directed against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court reversing a decree passed by the Civil Judge, Etah. The original decree was passed by the Civil Judge, on 31st March, 1953 in a suit instituted on 10th August, 1950. The judgment of the High Court reversing it was given on 31st January, 1964. It took nearly eleven years for the High Court to dispose of the appeal before it. Then followed an appeal to this Court by certificate. The certificate proceedings took about four years. It was on 22nd January, 1968 that the certificate was granted. The appeal which came to be filed on the strength of this certificate had then to undergo a period of incubation in this Court for about eight years before this Court could get time to take it up for hearing. At long last, the unfortunate and heroic saga of this litigation is coming to an end. It has witnessed a silver jubilee, thanks to our system of administration of justice and our callousness and indifference to any drastic reforms in it. Cases like this, which are not infrequent, should be sufficient to shock our social as well as judicial conscience and activise us to move swiftly in the direction of overhauling and restructuring the entire legal and judicial system. The Indian people are very patient, but despite their infinite patience, they cannot afford to wait for twenty-five years to get justice. There is a limit of tolerance beyond which it would be disastrous to push our people. This case and many others like it strongly emphasise the urgency of the need for legal and judicial reform. A little tinkering here and there in the procedural laws will not help. What is needed is a drastic change, a new outlook, a fresh approach which takes into account the socio-economic realities and seeks to provide a cheap, expeditious and effective instrument for realisation of justice by all sections of the people, irrespective of their social or economic position or their financial resources.

2. The dispute in this appeal relates to a property situate in the town of Etah. The property consists of a residential house and three shops. One Shri Krishna Das was the owner of the property and by a deed dated 18th October, 1884 he made a disposition of the property in favour of his daughter-in-law Smt. Deva. Smt. Deva in her turn executed two gift deeds, one dated 13th January, 1915 in respect of two shops in favour of Shri Raghunathji Maharaj, the 1st respondent and the other dated 18th June, 1949 in respect of the residential house and the remaining shop in favour of her daughters son Mool Chand, the 2nd respondent. On the death of Smt. Deva. which occurred on 12th April, 1950, the appellant claiming to be the nearest collateral in the family of Shri Krishna Das, filed Suit No. 18 of 1950 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Etah claiming that under the deed 18th October, 1884 Smt. Deva was given only a life interest in the property and she was, therefore, not entitled to gift any portion of the property in favour fo the 1st or the 2nd respondent beyond her lifetime and on her death, he became the owner of the property as the nearest collateral in the family of Shri Krishna Das and hence was entitled to possession of the property from the 1st and the 2nd respondents. Respondents Nos. 3 to 9 were impleaded as defendants in the suit as they were tenants in respect of certain portions of the property. There was no contest against the claim of the appellant on the part of respondents Nos. 3 to 9 and they expressed their willingness to pay rent to whosoever was declared to be the owner of the property. The 1st and the 2nd respondents, however, seriously disputed the claim of the appellant and contended that Smt. Deva was the full owner of the 1736 property under the deed dated 18th October, 1884 and she was, therefore, entitled to gift portions of the property in favour of the 1st and the 2nd respondents and convey full title to them and the appellan