NIMMAGADDA SABASIVA RAO Vs. STATE OF ANDHARA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision filed under Sec.21 of Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (for short "the Act"). The petitioner and his major son filed separate declarations under the provisions of the Act inrespect of the lands held by them. After due enquiry by order dt5-11-1979 the Land Reforms Tribunal held that both of them are non-surplus holders. On appeals filed by the State the matter was remanded to the primary Tribunal on 6-1-1984 to consider the question whether the lands covered by certain agreements of sale were liable to be included in the holdings of the declarants or not. Questioning the said order of remand, the petitioner herein filed C.R.P.No.912/85. By order Dt4-8-87 the said C.R.P. was allowed in part holding that the petitioner's major son was entitled to hold one standard holding of land separately. It was, however, held that the lands covered by agreements of sale have to be included in the holdings of the declarant, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court reported in STATE OF A.P. vs. ASHRAFUDDIN (1) AIR 1982 SC 913.. With the said findings the matter was remitted back to the primary Tribunal for fresh computation, Mleanwhile the A.P.Amendment Act (Act 13/86) to the Hindu Succession Act came into force. The petitioner thereupon raised the plea by that by virtue of the said amendment his major unmarried daughter NimMagadda Durga was also entitled to hold one standard holding separately, if so the family unit is not liable to surrender any land at, all and there will be no surplus. As the Land Reforms Tribunal as well as the appellate Tribunal on appeal negatived the said contention, this revision is filed.

(2.) In support of the said claim the petitioner relies on a decision of this Court reported in A.ALIVELAMMA vs. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LR) (2) 1987(2) APLJ, 192. wherein it was held that Sec. 29-A of the Hindu Succession Act, which was inserted by A.p.Act 13/86, enables the daughter to claim her rights in the joint family property on par with her brothers. Sec.29-A of the Hindu Succession Act reads thus:

(3.) C.R.P. is accordingly allowed and the impugned orders are set aside and the land Reforms Tribunal is directed to compute the holdings of the petitioner afresh givihg the benefit of separate standard holding to the unmarried major daughter of the petitioner also No costs.