1976 Supreme(AP) 49
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Ramachandra Rao, J.
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – Appellant
Vs.
MALLADI RAMA SUBBAIAH – Respondent
C.R.P. No. 1578 and 1744 of 1976
Decided on : 18-03-1977
The Govt. Pleader for G.A.D, for the Appellant; P. Anjaneya Sarma and N.V. Ranganadham, for the Respondent
A child in the womb of its mother on the notified date of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 and which is born subsequently is to be treated as a minor member of the family unit as defined in section 3 (f) of the Act.
Headnote:
LAND REFORMS - CEILING ON AGRICULTURAL HOLDINGS - FAMILY UNIT - CHILD IN THE WOMB OF ITS MOTHER ON THE NOTIFIED DATE - WHETHER A MEMBER OF THE FAMILY UNIT - INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 3 (F) OF THE ANDHRA PRADESH LAND REFORMS (CEILING ON AGRICULTURAL HOLDINGS) ACT, 1973.
Fact of the Case:
Two revision petitions were filed challenging the orders of the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunals, Ongole and Srikakulam, regarding the inclusion or exclusion of a child in the womb of its mother on the notified date as a member of the family unit under the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that a child in the womb of its mother on the notified date of the Act and which is born subsequently has to be treated as a minor member of the family unit as defined in section 3 (f) of the Act.
Issues: Whether a child in the womb of its mother on the notified date of the Act and which is born subsequently can be treated as a member of the family unit under the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on various textual authorities and decided cases to establish the general principle that a child in the womb of its mother is treated as being in existence at on the date of the conception provided the child is born alive subsequently. The court found that this principle is universally recognized and can be invoked and applied to cases falling under the Ceiling Act.
Final Decision: The court allowed the revision petition filed by the declarant (C.R.P. 1744/1976) and set aside the order of the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, Srikakulam. The court directed that the daughter born to the petitioner in June 1965 be included in the family unit of the petitioner, and his family unit is declared entitled to hold 1,4000 standard holdings.
Ramachandra Rao
1. In these two revision petitions filed u/s 21 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the said question that arises for consideration is, whether a child in the womb of its mother on the notified date viz., 1-1-1975 the date on which the Act came into force and which was born subsequently, is entitled to be treated as a members of the 'family unit' u/s 3 (f) of the Act. C.R.P. No. 1578/1976 has been filed by the Government against the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, Ongole, in L.R.A. No. 46/1976, where the Chairman of the said Tribunal took the view that such a child is member of the 'family unit' and the Member of the Appellate Tribunal took a contrary view.
2. C.R.P. No. 1744/1976 has been filed by the declarant against the order of the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, Srikakulam, where the Appellate Tribunal took the view that such a child in the womb of its mother, could not be treated as a member of the family unit as defined in section 3 (f) of the Act.
'family unit' is defined in Sec. 3 (f)of the Act, as follows:-
"Family unit" means-
(i) in the case of an individual who has a appose or spouses, such individual, the spouse or spouses and their minor sons and their unmarried minor sons and their unmarried minor daughters, if any:
(ii) in the case of an individual who has no spouse, such individual and his or her minor sons and unmarried minor daughters.
(iii) in the case of an individual who is a divorced husband and who has not remarried, such individual and his minor sons and unmarried minor daughters, whether in his custody of not, and
(iv) Where an individual and his or her spouse are both dead, their minor sons and unmarried minor daughters.
Explanation:-Where a minor son is married, his wife and their off spring, if any, shall also be deemed to be members of the family unit of which the minor son is as member" Section 4 of the Act which prescribes the ceiling area of a family unit consisting of five members or more, and of an individual who is not a member of a family unit, reads as follows:-
4, Ceiling area:- (1) The ceiling area in the case of a family unit consisting of not more than five members shall be an extent of land equal to one standard holding.
(2) The ceiling area in the case of a family unit consisting of more than five members shall be an extent of land equal to one standard holding plus an additional extent of one fifth of one standard holding for every such member in excess of five, so however that the ceiling area shall not exceed two standard holdings.
3. u/s 8 of the Act, a declaration has to be filled by every person if his holding on the notified date exceeds the ceiling area prescribed by the Act.
4. u/s 9, the Tribunal has to determine the ceiling area on the basis of the declaration furnished or information obtained u/s 8 of the Act, after making an enquiry in the prescribed manner. The Explanation to section 9 which is relevant for the purpose of these cases, reads as follows:-
Save as otherwise provided in this Act, in the case of family unit, the number of members of the family unit shall be reckoned with reference to the notified date.
5. This explanation clearly indicates that the manner of the family unit has to fee determined with reference to the notified date i.e., 1-1-1975.
6. The question that arises for consideration is, whether a child in the womb of its mother on the notified date i.e., 1-1-1975 and which was born subsequently can be treated as having been in existence on the notified date and such a child can be counted as a member of the family unit on the notified date.
7. The learned Government Pleader submits that unless the child is born and is actually in existence as on the notified date, it could not be treated as a member of the family unit, and that the definition of family unit shows that the member should be minor son or an unmarried minor daughter, and a child not born by the