GURAMMA Vs. VAIJNATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants/plaintiffs, having been denied the half share in the suit agricultural land bearing Survey No. 57/a, 67/b and 61/1 of village Hallali, Taluka. Nilanga and being granted only half share in the house described in the plaint by the Additional District Judge in Regular civil Appeal No. 30/80, have preferred this Appeal inter alia contending that the learned Additional District Judge fell in serious error in holding that the hindu Women's Rights to Property (extension to Agricultural Lands Act 32 of 1954) came in force in the State of Hyderabad on 15th October, 1954 and that the learned Appellate Judge ignored the enactment of the Hindu Women's rights to Property Act of 1937 (Act No. 48/52) in the State of Hyderabad on 22nd January, 1953 and that the said Act relating to the extension to agricultural lands is only clarificatory and declaratory and in view of this, the appellant/plaintiffs are entitled to the partition to the extent of half share in the above suit lands. It is emphasized by the learned Advocate for the appellants that the learned Trial Judge was pleased to pass the decree in favour of the plaintiffs, however, on the only basis that Hindu Women's Rights to property Act was extended to Nizam's State of Hyderebad. The real perspective emerging from the application of the said Act to the State of Hyderabad has been lost sight of and that the learned Trial Judge also failed to interpret the Hindu Women's Right to Property Act of 1937 as one which is declaratory and clarificatory. Despite this infirmity, the learned Trial Judge landed on a correct conclusion, but the same needs to be explained and clarified by holding that the Act of 1953 is the substantive Act and, therefore, prospective in operation and that Act of 1954 is clarificatory and declaratory act and is, therefore, retrospective in operation.

(2.) THE real question which poses for consideration is as to whether the hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, 1937. which came into force in the state of Hyderabad on 22nd January, 1953, would include the agricultural lands, more so in the background of the fact that the subsequent Act, viz. the Hindu Women's Right to Property (Extension to Agricultural Lands)Act, 1954, which came in force on 22nd October, 1954. According to the learned Advocate for the Appellants, this Act of 1954 is a declaratory piece of legislation and will operate retrospectively i. e. with effect from the First act Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, which came into force in the state of Hyderabad on 22nd January, 1953. Incidentally, even if the date of publication of this Act in the gazette is concerned, the same was published on 7th February, 1953. The dates are relevant because the person through whom the appellants have laid claim on the suit lands is one Ramshetti of whom appellent No. 1 is the wife and Appellant No. 2 is the daughter. It does not seem to be indispute that Ramshetty died in July, 1954.

(3.) IN order to appreciate this argument, few facts may be stated and they are that Plaintiff No. 1 Guramma is the wife now the widow of deceased ramshetty ; while Plaintiff No. 2 Iramma is the daughter. One Virappa was the brother of Ramshetty and the brothers together formed the Joint Hindu family. The respondents/defendants are the sons and daughters of Virappa. Respondent No. 3 Kashibai is the wife of deceased Virappa. After the death of Ramshetty, the present appellants/plaintiffs filed Regular Civil Suit No. 179/1/59 against deceased Virappa and others for possession of share in the suit property on the ground that there was partition between the brothers and that Virappa and others had dispossessed the plaintiffs from the suit lands. The said suit was dismissed because the present appellants/plaintiffs failed to prove the partition. Thereafter, it is alleged that the defendants refused to give share to the plaintiffs somewhere in the year 1971 and again in the diwali of 1973. The plaintiffs, therefore, filed the present suit being Regular civil Suit No. 88/78 for partition and possession of the family lands and the house.