Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, K.M. JOSEPH, JJ.
Vithaldas Jagannath Khatri (D) through Shakuntala Alias Sushma and Others – Appellants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra Revenue and Forest Department and Others – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 6006 of 2009
Decided On : 29-08-2019
Per SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.
(a) Interpretation of statute - Preamble - Sets forth objects of the Act - But it cannot restrict or enlarge the provisions - It has to be seen whether there is any ambiguity in the provisions requiring any further aid for construction. (Para 19)
(b) Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act 1961 - Sections 8, 10, 11 - There is no ambiguity in the language of these sections - Any aid to construct meaning of these sections not required. (Para 20)
(c) Deeming fiction - Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act 1961 - Amendment of 1972 - Section 18, 10 and 11- Made applicable from 2.10.1975 - However, creating a deeming fiction that transactions occurring from 26.9.1970 would be null and void - Also, documents of all transactions prior to 26.9.1970 including partition deeds must have been executed and presented for registration before that date - To prevent circumvention by dubious and indirect methods during the window of 5 years - However, the window cannot expanded to an unlimited prior period of time - Instantly partition deed executed and registered before the cut-off date, i.e., 26.9.1970 - (Para 21, 23, 24, 26)
(d) Administration of justice - Judicial propriety - Owner of the land executing partition deed giving shares to his two elder daughters and vesting the land in them for education and marriage purposes - Competent authority, SDO while determining surplus land, holding in favour of two elder daughters of the owner of land as the land had already vested in them - Other family members filing appeal not impleading the daughters not being necessary parties - The daughters need not and did not file appeal under Ceiling Act - State filing cross objections impugning order of competent authority even that portion which was in favour of the daughters - Similarly the competent authority also not impleaded - Held, cross objection could not be filed against a party who was not a party in the appeal - Further held, giving of land to daughters for the purpose being legally valid, appellate authority could not have sustained the cross objections. (Para 37)
(e) Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act 1961 - Section 4 - Family - Unmarried major daughters not included - Land given to unmarried daughters for marriage and education by a valid partition deed cannot be included in family unit of the father. (Para 38)
(f) Interpretation of document - Not form of the document but its content is what that matters - Instantly in partition deed father gifting land to daughters for marriage and education - No other member of family objecting - Held, gift not invalid - Section 122 & 123 of the Transfer of Property Act , 1882. (Para 39, 40, 41)
Per K.M. JOSEPH, J.
(g) Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act 1961 - Sections 10 and 11 - Even in case of genuine transfers and partitions - Rights of the transferee and beneficiaries of partition - Will be subsumed and prohibition under the Act will apply. (Para 54)
(h) Interpretation of statute - Presumptions to be made by Courts - Legislature has taken into consideration the felt necessities of the times - Legislature was aware of the law as it exists - And, Legislature was aware of the decisions rendered by the courts on points of law. (Para 56)
(i) Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act 1961 - Section 18 - If transferor or previous owner, by sale or partition, Continues to hold the property as such on appointed day - It must be ignored. (Para 59, 67)
(j) Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act 1961 - Sections 30 and 31 - Collector expressly empowered of civil court in matters of summoning and enforcing attendance as also consider relevant evidence - He is required to give reasons for his findings - Section 41 bars jurisdiction of civil courts. (Para 61, 65)
(k) Property law - Partition in Hindu joint family in 1970 - Owner partitioning his land among himself, three minor daughters and a minor son - Wife thought entitled to a share, not given any share - Daughters who were not entitled to any share at that time given share more than the son - Partition could be effected only between coparceners and daughters were not coparceners at that time - Partition held neither legal nor natural - Despite lack of pleading in that behalf in the cross objection, partition held to be sham. (Para 85, 86, 91, 98)
(l) Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act 1961 - Section 33 r/w Order LXI Rule 22, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Appeal - Cross objection - Cannot be maintained against a non-party - Incumbent upon respondent seeking to maintain cross objection against a non party person to implead him. (Para 99)
(m) Administration of justice - Appeal before Tribunal filed by the owner, his wife and youngest daughter - Elder sisters not party - Owner could not take a plea that the elder daughters be given opportunity of hearing - Elder daughters also not parties in writ petition before High Court - Owner dying during pendency of appeal before High Court - Elder sisters filing SLP as legal representative of late owner, not in their capacity as share holders as per partition - Held contention not canvassed by the owner before forums below cannot be taken by elder sisters now. (Para 105, 107, 109)
Facts of the case:
A Partition deed was executed between five parties - late Shri Vithaldas Jagannath Khatri and his then minor son and three minor daughters. Two of the minor daughters attained majority before the commencement date of 2.10.1975, though they were not major on 26.9.1970. In terms of this document, the agricultural land of the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) is sought to be divided by mentioning all the parties as part of the HUF. The lands were stated to be used jointly and shares in the lands were given to both, the minor son and the daughters.
On the provisions of the said Act coming into force, the Surplus Lands Distribution Tribunal instituted proceedings in exercise of suo moto powers in respect of the return filed under Section 12 of the said Act by Vithaldas. In the course of the assessment proceedings regarding surplus land, the holdings of the entire family were taken into consideration. This order was assailed before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal which dismissed the appeal resulting in proceedings being filed by Vithaldas, before the High Court. Single Judge of the High Court remitted the matter back to the SLDT for fresh inquiry, on the ground of lack of adequate opportunity provided to Vithaldas and others to present their case.
On remand, a fresh assessment was made by the SDO excluding (a) Potkharab land of Vithaldas, to the extent of 12.16 acres; (b) Field Survey No. 106, which was stated to be vesting with the wife of Vithaldas, having been gifted by her father-in-law Jagannath and (c) the land allotted to the two major daughters of Vithaldas, Shakuntala and Durgadevi.
The appeal proceedings were lodged by Vithaldas, his wife, the son and the third daughter, Beladevi, under Section 33 of the said Act. The other two minor daughters, who had attained majority before 2.10.1975, however, did not file the appeal as they were apparently satisfied with the view adopted by the SDO. The State also filed cross- objections challenging the exclusion of the land by the SDO qua (b) & (c) aforesaid. The appeal court dismissed the appeal, and allowed the cross-objections.
The aforesaid appellate order was challenged by Vithaldas and his wife in the writ proceedings before the High Court which was dismissed.
An intra-court appeal was also dismissed.
Finding of the Court:
The Hon’ble Judges differed in their views.
Result: Matter referred to larger Bench.
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.
1. The socialistic agenda of the nascently formed Indian State with large landless poor population was given an impetus inter-alia by a number of State legislations for re-distribution of agricultural land, by putting a ceiling limit on the same, and then allotting it to the landless poor. We are concerned here with the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘said Act’). The said Act also went through many amendments top fine tune different aspects, most importantly the aspect of plugging loopholes, whereby owners having land in excess of the ceiling limit would endeavour to somehow re-distribute it among the family to bring it within the ceiling limit, or at least, to reduce the excess land. The objective of the said Act can well be deciphered from its preamble, which reads as under:
“An Act to impose a maximum limit (or ceiling) on the holding of agricultural land in the State of Maharashtra; to provide for the acquisition and distribution of land held in excess of such ceiling; to provide that the lands taken over from undertakings and the integrity of which is maintained in compact blocks, for ensuring the full and efficient use of the land for agriculture and its efficient management through corporations (including a company) owned or controlled by the State, be granted to such corporations or company; and for matters connected with the purposes aforesaid.”
2. Chapter III of the said Act made provisions restricting transfers and acquisitions and the consequences of contraventions. The relevant Sections falling in the Chapter are reproduced hereunder:
“Section 8 - Restriction on transfer
Where a person, or as the case may be, a family unit holds land in excess of the ceiling area on or after the commencement date, such person, or as the case may be, any member of the family unit shall not, on and after that date, transfer any land, until the land in excess of the ceiling area is determined under this Act.
Explanation - In this section "transfer" means transfer, whether by way of sale, gift, mortgage with possession, exchange, lease, assignment of land for maintenance, surrender of a tenancy or resumption of land by a landlord or any other disposition, whether by act of parties made inter vivos or by decree or order of a court, tribunal or authority (except where such decree or order is passed in a proceeding which is instituted in such Court, Tribunal or before such authority before the 26th day of September, 1970), but does not include transfer by way of sale or otherwise of land for the recovery of land revenue or for sums recoverable as arrears of land revenue, or acquisition of land for a public purpose under any law for the time being in force.”
.............. .............. ..............
Section 10 - Consequences of certain transfers and acquisitions of land
(1) If:-
(a) any person or a member of a family unit, after the 26th day of September, 1970 but before the commencement date, transfers any land in anticipation of or in order to avoid or defeat the object of the Amending Act, 1972.
(b) any land is transferred in contravention of section 8, then, in calculating the ceiling area which that person, or as the case may be, the family unit, is entitled to hold, the land so transferred shall be taken into consideration, and the land exceeding the ceiling area so calculated shall be deemed to be in excess of the ceiling area for that holding, notwithstanding that the land remaining with him or with the family unit may not in fact be in excess of the ceiling area.
If by reason of such transfer, the holding of a person, or as the case may be, of the family unit is less than the area so calculated to be in excess of the ceiling area, then all the land of the person, or as the case may be, the family unit shall be deemed to be surplus land; and out of the land so transferred and in possession of the transferee [unless such land is liable to forfeit
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
