Case Note & Summary
This appeal by special leave arose from the judgment dated December 14, 1977 passed by the Allahabad High Court in Second Appeal No. 500 of 1965. The dispute concerned succession to the properties of one Bechan, a bhumidar under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. Bechan had two wives, Bhungi and Bhikni. Bhungi had three daughters, Gulabi, Sulabi and Bulaki, the appellant. Bhikni had a son named Laldhar from a former husband, whom she brought along when she married Bechan, and after the marriage she had a daughter named Gunia. During his lifetime, Bechan executed three gift deeds in favour of Laldhar: the first two in June 1951 and the third on November 18, 1957. Bechan died in 1957. The appellant challenged the gift deeds. The appellate court and the High Court upheld the validity of the first two gift deeds and declared the third gift deed invalid. The appellant then approached the Supreme Court by special leave. Pending the proceedings, Bhungi died and Sulabi and Bulaki were substituted as her legal heirs. During the pendency of the appeal in the Supreme Court, the co-widow Bhikni also died. The legal issues before the Supreme Court included whether the permission for alienation was properly obtained from a competent officer under Section 24 of the Act, whether the Sub-Divisional Officer had territorial jurisdiction, whether the High Court could examine the jurisdiction question suo motu, and how the property devolved among the widows and daughters under Sections 171, 172 and 175 of the Act. The appellant's counsel argued that the permission for alienation was not properly obtained because the application was made on January 1, 1951 and sanction was granted on June 2, 1951, but that the proviso to Section 24 validated subsequent permission. He also contended that the Sub-Divisional Officer lacked jurisdiction as the lands were situated outside his division, and that the High Court should not have gone into that question for the first time. The Supreme Court found no infirmity in the grant of sanction and upheld the first two gift deeds as valid. It noted that the High Court had secured the official map and found as a fact that the lands were situated within the area of the officer who granted permission; even if not legally permissible, since the learned Judge had done it to do justice, the Supreme Court would not interfere under Article 136. As regards the property under the third gift deed, the Court held that since Bechan died in 1957, succession opened under Section 171(b) and the two widows jointly succeeded. Upon Bhungi's death, the co-widow Bhikni succeeded by survivorship under Section 175. Upon Bhikni's death, her daughter Gunia and Bhungi's daughters Sulabi and Bulaki (Gulabi having predeceased) succeeded under Section 172(1) read with Section 171(1)(g) of the Act. The Court accordingly held that in respect of the properties covered by the invalid third gift deed, all three daughters were entitled to a one-third share each. The appeal was allowed and the decree of the trial Court was modified to that extent, with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Property Law - Validity of Gift Deeds - Alienation by Bhumidar - U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, Section 24 - The first two gift deeds executed on June 1 and 2, 1951 were challenged on the ground that permission for alienation was not properly obtained; the Court found that an application for permission was made to the Sub-Divisional Officer on January 1, 1951 and sanction was granted on June 2, 1951, which under the proviso to Section 24 validated the alienation - Held that there was no infirmity in the grant of sanction and the two gift deeds were valid, so the properties covered were not open to succession. B) Constitutional Law - Judicial Review - High Court's Suo Motu Examination of Jurisdiction - Constitution of India, Article 136; U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, Section 24 - The appellant contended that the Sub-Divisional Officer lacked territorial jurisdiction and that the High Court ought not to have raised this question for the first time; the High Court had secured the official map and found that the lands were situated within the officer's sub-division - Held that even if such examination was not legally permissible, the finding being based on official map and done to do justice, the Supreme Court did not interfere under Article 136. C) Succession Law - Devolution of Bhumidari Rights - Succession on Death of Male Holder with Two Widows - U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, Sections 171(b), 175 - Bechan died in 1957 leaving two widows, Bhungi and Bhikni; under Section 171(b) the widows jointly succeeded to the property; during proceedings Bhungi died and the co-widow Bhikni succeeded by survivorship under Section 175 - Held that the interest of the deceased co-widow passed by survivorship to the surviving co-widow. D) Succession Law - Devolution Among Daughters - Rights of Daughters of Predeceased Widows - U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, Sections 172(1), 171(1)(g) - After Bhikni died leaving daughter Gunia, and Bhungi having had three daughters Gulabi, Sulabi, Bulaki with Gulabi predeceasing mother, the Court held that Sulabi, Bulaki and Guniya succeeded to the estate of the male holder under Section 172(1) read with Section 171(1)(g) - Held that in respect of the property covered by the invalid third gift deed dated November 18, 1957, each of the three daughters was entitled to a 1/3rd share.
Issue of Consideration
Whether permission for alienation of bhumidari land was properly obtained from a competent officer under Section 24 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950; whether the Sub-Divisional Officer had territorial jurisdiction to sanction the gift deeds; whether the High Court could examine the question of jurisdiction for the first time; and how the property of a deceased bhumidar devolved among widows and daughters under Sections 171, 172 and 175 of the Act.
Final Decision
The appeal was allowed. The decree of the trial Court was modified to the extent that in respect of the properties conveyed under the third gift deed dated November 18, 1957, Sulabi, Bulaki and Guniya were each entitled to a one-third share. The first two gift deeds executed on June 1 and 2, 1951 were upheld as valid and the properties covered thereunder were held not open to succession. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Permission under proviso to Section 24 of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act
- 1950 validates subsequent alienation by gift
- Jurisdiction of Sub-Divisional Officer to grant permission for alienation
- High Court's suo motu examination of jurisdiction based on official map not interfered under Article 136
- Succession of bhumidar under Section 171(b)
- Survivorship among co-widows under Section 175
- Succession by daughters under Section 172(1) read with Section 171(1)(g)
