Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
RAMENDRA SINGH
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
DATE OF JUDGMENT23/01/1984
BENCH:
VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J)
BENCH:
VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J)
THAKKAR, M.P. (J)
CITATION:
1984 AIR 515 1984 SCC (1) 751
1984 SCALE (1)140
ACT:
Madhya Pradesh Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings, Act,
1960 (Act No. 20 of 1960), Section 6 and read with Section
2(gg), construction of-whether, in view of the wording in
section 6 (ii) viz "each member of the family, including a
minor son would become a holder entitled to a separate unit
of the ceiling area", the minor son will be entitled to
claim a separate ceiling area independently.
HEADNOTE:
Dismissing the Special Leave Petition, the Court,
^
HELD: Section 6(ii) of the M. P. Ceiling on
Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960 does not have any effect on
the ceiling area to which a family as defined in Section 2
(gg) is entitled under Section 7. A minor son who is deemed
to be entitled to an area of Joint Family land proportionate
to his share under s. 6 (ii) is not entitled to a separate
ceiling area independently. His share of land can be clubbed
with the land which can be claimed by his father as his
ceiling area. [452D;B]
Begulla Bapi Raju etc. v. State of A. P. (1983) 2 Scale
141 followed.
Sarjubai & Ors. v. State of M. P. & Ors. (Misc.
Petition No. 811 of 197 of M. P. High Court) approved.
JUDGMENT:
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Petition for Special
Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 14604 of 1983.
From the Judgment and Order dated the 2nd September.
1983 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court (Indore Bench) in
Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 193 of 1978.
G.L. Sanghi, S.K Gambhir and Ashok Mahajan for the
Petitioner.
Ravindra Bana and A.K Sanghi for the Respondent.
The Order of the Court was delivered by
VENKATARAMIAH, J. The contention of the petitioner in
the above case is that on a true construction of section 6
read with section 2(gg) of the Madhya Pradesh Ceiling on
Agricultural Holdings Act,
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
452
1960 (Act No. 20 of 1960) (hereinafter referred to as ’the
Act’) each member of the family, including a minor son would
become a holder entitled to a separate unit of the ceiling
area., In other words, it is argued that a minor son who is
deemed to be entitled to an area of joint family land
proportionate to his share under section 6(ii) of the Act is
entitled to claim a separate ceiling area independently. It
is contended that his share of land cannot be clubbed with
the land which can be claimed by his father as his ceiling
area,
We have heard Shri G.L. Sanghi, learned counsel for the
petitioner. He has taken us through the relevant provisions
of the Act viz. section 2 (gg), section 6 and section 7 of
the Act. The High Court has negatived the above contention
of the petitioner relying upon its earlier decision in
Sarjubai & Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. (Misc.
Petition No, 811 of 1979). We have gone through that
decision, on going through the said decision, we find that
it is correctly decided, We agree with the reasons given in
support of the said decision, It is in conformity with the
view expressed by this Court in Begulla Bapi Raju etc. v.
State of Andhra Pradesh.
Section 6(ii) of the Act does not have any effect on
the ceiling area to which a family as defined in section
2(gg) is entitled under section 7.
The petition is accordingly dismissed,
S.R. Petition dismissed
453