2000 (11) TMI 1254 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the parties are members of a Joint Hindu Family and if the khatas in question are held for all members of the Joint Hindu Family.
2. Whether the High Court was justified in interfering with the findings of the Deputy Director of Consolidation.
3. Applicability of the U.P. Tenancy Act, 1939 and the United Provinces Agricultural Tenants [Acquisition of Privileges] Act, 1953 to the case.

Summary:

Issue 1: Joint Hindu Family and Khatas
The respondents claimed that the parties are members of a Joint Hindu Family and that the khatas are held in a representative capacity for all family members. The appellants denied this, asserting individual ownership. The Consolidation Officer dismissed the objections, but the Settlement Officer Consolidation later held that the khatas were joint family property, entitling each party to a 1/6th share. The Deputy Director of Consolidation reversed this, but the High Court restored the Settlement Officer's decision, affirming the joint family status and co-ownership of the khatas.

Issue 2: High Court's Interference
The appellants argued that the High Court should not have interfered with the Deputy Director's findings, as his powers u/s 48 of the Consolidation Act are broad enough to reassess facts. The High Court, however, noted that the Deputy Director's findings were not supported by evidence and were based on improper consideration. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, emphasizing that the Deputy Director's powers, although wide, do not equate to those of an appellate authority and should not disturb findings unless they are perverse or unsupported by evidence.

Issue 3: Applicability of Tenancy Laws
The appellants contended that tenancy rights should be inherited according to the U.P. Tenancy Act, 1939, not personal law, and that the Joint Hindu Family could not hold tenancy rights. The Supreme Court noted that while succession of tenancy rights is governed by specific Acts, the joint family continued to exist, and the khatas, now comprising Bhumidari and Sirdari lands, are held collectively for the benefit of all family members. The Court approved the Full Bench decision of the Allahabad High Court, which stated that the joint family collectively owns the property, and the khatedars hold it for the family's benefit.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court found no illegality in the High Court's judgment and dismissed the appeal with costs, affirming that the khatas are held for the benefit of all members of the Joint Hindu Family.