9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1986 (2) TMI 333 - SC - Indian LawsWhether after the coming into force of the Part States (Laws) Act 1951 the Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092 continues to govern intestate succession to the property of a member of the Indian Christian Community in the territories originally forming part of the erstwhile state of Travancore or is such intestate succession governed by the Indian Succession Act 1925? Held that - On the coming into force of Part-B States (Laws) Act 1951 the Travancore Cochin Succession Act 1092 stood repealed and Chapter II of Part V of the Indian Succession Act 1925 became applicable and intestate succession to the property of members of the Indian Christian community in the territories of the erstwhile State of Travancore was thereafter governed by Chapter II of Part V of the Indian Succession Act 1925. On this view it becomes unnecessary to consider whether sections 24 28 and 29 of the Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092 are unconstitutional and void. We therefore allow the writ petitions and declare that intestate succession to the property of Indian Christians in the territories of the former State of Travancore is governed by the provisions contained in Chapter II of Part V of the Indian Succession Act 1925. Petitions allowed.
Issues Involved:
1. Applicability of the Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092 post the enactment of the Part States (Laws) Act 1951. 2. Constitutionality of Sections 24, 28, and 29 of the Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092 under Article 14 of the Constitution. 3. Repeal of the Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092 by the Indian Succession Act 1925. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Applicability of the Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092 Post the Enactment of the Part States (Laws) Act 1951: The central issue was whether the Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092 continued to govern intestate succession for members of the Indian Christian community in the erstwhile State of Travancore after the Part States (Laws) Act 1951 came into force. The court examined the legislative history and the intent behind the enactment of the Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092, which aimed to consolidate and amend the rules of intestate succession among Indian Christians in Travancore. The Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092 was initially promulgated to establish a common law for all sections of Indian Christians in Travancore. However, with the merger of the State of Travancore with Cochin and the formation of the Part-B State of Travancore-Cochin, the Part-B States (Laws) Act 1951 was enacted to bring about uniformity in legislation across India, extending the Indian Succession Act 1925 to Part-B States, including Travancore-Cochin. 2. Constitutionality of Sections 24, 28, and 29 of the Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092 under Article 14 of the Constitution: The petitioners argued that the rules under the Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092 discriminated against women, violating Article 14 of the Constitution. Specifically, the Act provided that a widow or mother would only have a life interest in the intestate's immovable property, and daughters would receive a lesser share compared to sons. The court, however, deemed it unnecessary to examine the constitutional validity of these sections due to the consequential effect of the extension of the Indian Succession Act 1925 to Travancore-Cochin, which rendered the Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092 obsolete. 3. Repeal of the Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092 by the Indian Succession Act 1925: The court analyzed whether the extension of the Indian Succession Act 1925 repealed the Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092. Section 6 of the Part-B States (Laws) Act 1951 provided that any law corresponding to the Acts extended to Part-B States would stand repealed. The court concluded that the Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092, which dealt with intestate succession among Indian Christians, corresponded to Chapter II of Part V of the Indian Succession Act 1925. Consequently, the Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092 was repealed in its entirety upon the extension of the Indian Succession Act 1925 to Travancore-Cochin. The respondents' contention that Section 29(2) of the Indian Succession Act 1925 saved the Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092 was rejected. The court held that Section 29(2) was not a provision for incorporation by reference but a qualificatory provision. The Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092 was expressly repealed by Section 6 of the Part-B States (Laws) Act 1951, and thus, intestate succession in the territories of the former State of Travancore was governed by Chapter II of Part V of the Indian Succession Act 1925. Conclusion: The court declared that intestate succession to the property of Indian Christians in the territories of the former State of Travancore is governed by the provisions contained in Chapter II of Part V of the Indian Succession Act 1925. The writ petitions were allowed, and there was no order as to costs.
|
