Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 333-334 of 1998
PETITIONER:
TALUK LAND BOARD AND ORS.
RESPONDENT:
CYRIAC THOMAS AND ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 10/09/2002
BENCH:
SYED SHAH MOHAMMED QUADRI & S.N. VARIAVA
JUDGMENT:
JUDGMENT
2002 Supp(2) SCR 217
The following Order of the Court was delivered
The Taluk Land Board constituted under the Kerala Land Reforms Act 9 (for
short, ’the Act’) is in appeal against the common order made by a learned
single judge of the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam, in C.R.P. Nos. 1669
and 2453 of 1993, on November 18, 1996. By the impugned order, the High
Court accepted the sale deeds executed by the sisters of the declarant-
Cyriac Thomas (the first respondent) resulting in leaving no excess land to
be surrendered by him.
The point that arises for consideration is whether the sisters of the
declarant had title to the land or it, in fact, belonged to the declarant
and therefore, the sales ought to be ignored and the land added to his
holding.
One Mr. Elanjikkal Cyriac died sometime before 1958. He was survived by his
three sons, including the declarant, and four daughters. He left some
agricultural land. As long back as in 1978, the appellant held that the
declarant had no excess land to surrender, However, in 1980, the case was
reopened and after taking into consideration the objections filed by him,
the appellant held that the first respondent had 9.87 acres of land in
excess of the ceiling limit as on January 1, 1970. On December 5, 1985 the
High Court on the civil revision petition filed against the said order,
remanded the matter to the appellant. After remand, the appellant by its
order dated August 12, 1993 quantified the excess land (7.26.040 acres)
which was to be surrendered by him. It was against that order of the
appellant two civil revision petitions were filed - one by the declarant
and the other by his three sisters. The High Court disposed them of by the
impugned judgment, referred to above. That is how the present appeals are
before us.
The germane question is whether the declarant, his two brothers and four
sisters are entitled to a share in the land left by the deceased Elanjikkal
Cyriac. The answer to question determines the result of this case. If all
of them had inherited the land, the appeals are bound to fail but if it is
found the sisters did not, then sales effected by them would be invalid and
the appellant will have to succeed, the declarant shall be liable to
surrender the excess land as held by the appellant. Succession to the
estate of a person was governed by the Travancore Christian Succession Act,
1092 in the erstwhile State of Travancore Cochin which was a Part-B Stale.
The Indian Succession Act was extended to the Travancore Cochin State by
Part-B States (Laws) Act. 1951. Consequently, all the children of the
deceased Cyriac inherited the land under the Indian Succession Act. It is
not disputed that if the Indian Succession Act applies, all the sisters
will be entitled to equal share along with the brothers in the properties
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
left by the deceased Elanjikkal Cyriac. This position came to be recognised
by the judgment of this Court in Mary Roy and Ors. v. State of Kerala and
Ors., [1986] 2 SCC 209. This court laid down that on extension of the
Indian Succession Act, 1925 to Part-B State of Travancore Cochin, the
Indian Succession Act applied to succession opened thereafter. It follows
that all the sisters had share in the land and, therefore, the land covered
by the sales in question could not be added to the holding of the declarant
as the deed executed by them would be valid.
In this view of the matter, the order under challenge warrants no
interference. The appeals fail and they are dismissed but in the
circumstances of the case, without any order as to costs.