2019 (5) TMI 1975 - SC - Indian Laws

Applicability of Section 22 of the Act to agricultural lands - Preferential right given to an heir of a Hindu under said Section 22 of the Hindu Succession Act 1956 - property in question is an agricultural land - HELD THAT - In the present case it is nobody s case that the matter relating to succession to an interest in agricultural lands is in any way dealt with by any State legislation operating in the State of Himachal Pradesh or that such legislation must prevail in accordance with the principles under Article 254 of the Constitution of India. The field is occupied only by Section 22 of the Act insofar as State of Himachal Pradesh is concerned. The High Court was therefore absolutely right in holding that Section 22 of the Act would operate in respect of succession to agricultural lands in the State. Even if it be accepted that the provisions of Section 22 would apply in respect of succession to agricultural lands the question still remains whether the preferential right could be enjoyed by one or more of the heirs. Would that part also be within the competence of the Parliament? The right in or over land land tenures are within the exclusive competence of the State legislatures under Entry 18 of List II of the Constitution. Pre-emption laws enacted by State legislatures are examples where preferential rights have been conferred upon certain categories and classes of holders in cases of certain transfers of agricultural lands. Whether conferring a preferential right by Section 22 would be consistent with the basic idea and principles is the question - the content of preferential right cannot be disassociated in the present case from the principles of succession. They are both part of the same concept. The preferential right given to an heir of a Hindu under Section 22 of the Act is applicable even if the property in question is an agricultural land. The High Court was right in affirming the judgment and decree passed by the Court of District Judge Hamirpur - Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Scope and applicability of Section 22 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
2. Preferential right of an heir under Section 22 concerning agricultural land.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Scope and Applicability of Section 22 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956:
The primary issue in this case was whether the preferential right given to an heir under Section 22 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, applies to agricultural land. The appellant contended that Section 22 does not cover agricultural lands, relying on the historical context and various judicial precedents. The court examined the legislative history and the evolution of relevant entries in the legislative lists under the Government of India Act, 1935, and the Constitution of India.

The court noted that the Federal Court had previously held that laws regarding the devolution of agricultural land were within the exclusive domain of provincial legislatures. However, the situation changed with the adoption of the Constitution of India. The court highlighted that the present Entry 5 of List III (Concurrent List) includes "intestacy and succession" without the earlier qualification "save as regards agricultural land." This indicates that both Union and State legislatures have concurrent competence over succession, including agricultural lands.

The court also referred to the decision in Vaijanath vs. Guramma, where it was held that the Legislature of the State of Hyderabad was competent to enact laws dealing with intestacy and succession relating to joint family property, including agricultural land.

2. Preferential Right of an Heir Under Section 22 Concerning Agricultural Land:
The court analyzed whether the preferential right under Section 22 could be enjoyed by heirs concerning agricultural land. It considered three scenarios:
a) Jointly purchased agricultural holding by unrelated persons.
b) Jointly purchased agricultural holding by siblings.
c) Inherited agricultural holding by siblings.

In the first two scenarios, the right of pre-emption would be governed by relevant State legislation. However, in the third scenario, where the agricultural holding is inherited, the principles of Section 22 would apply. The court reasoned that the source of title or interest in the third scenario is through succession recognized by the Act, and therefore, the manner of exercising that right is also governed by the Act.

The court emphasized that the preferential right aims to keep family properties within the family and prevent outsiders from acquiring such properties easily. This objective aligns with the broader principles of succession under the Act.

Conclusion:
The court concluded that the preferential right under Section 22 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, applies to agricultural land. The High Court's decision affirming the judgment and decree of the District Judge, Hamirpur, was upheld. The court also overruled various High Court decisions that held contrary to this conclusion.

Judgment:
The appeal was dismissed without any order as to costs.