SARAT KUMAR U Vs. AUTHORISED OFFICER LR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This case has come before us by a preference of a Single Judge of this Court disagreeing with the view in earlier decision of this Court in A. Alivelamma vs. Spl. Tahsildar L. R. on the question as to whether a major unmarried daughter is entitled to one standard holding under the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 ( hereinafter referred to as "Land Reforms Act"). The learned Judge took the view that even though an unmarried major daughter becomes a coparcener by her birth in a Joint Hindu Family by virtue of the Amendment, yet, it does not enure to her benefit to claim a separate holding for herself under the provisions of the Land Reforms Act.

(2.) In A. Alivelamma's case (supra) an opposite view had been taken that Section 29-A (of Hindu Succession Act) has an overriding effect starting with a non-obstante clause that the daughter of a coparcener shall by her birth become a coparcener in her own right in the same manner as a son and shall have the same rights in the coparcenary property as she would have, had she been a son, inclusive of the right to claim by survivorship. The consequence of the decision was that a major unmarried daughter in the family was held as entitled to be treated as a separate family unit.

(3.) The Andhra Pradesh Act 1 of 1973, is a socially beneficient legislation intended for achieving sweeping agricultural reforms and has the purpose to divest concentration of agricultural land in the landed affluent and for an equitable distribution of such landed wealth amongst the needy and exploited class of persons. It is for such a reason that provision has been made for compulsory vesting of private agricultural land in the State for distribution of the same amongst the landless. In progressive realisation of such objective the Constitution itself was amended by abolishing Article 31 and introducing Article 31-A. With that objective in view, the Act defined in Section 3 (f) family unit, so far as relevant to the present case, to mean in the case of an individual who has a spouse or spouses, such individual, the spouses and their minor sons and their unmarried minor daughters, if any. Logically, it was also said that where the individual has no spouse, the family unit would mean, himself and his or her minor sons and unmarried minor daughters; where the individual is a divorced husband and has not remarried, the expression is to mean the individual and his minor sons and unmarried minor daughters whether in his custody or not; and where both the individual or his spouse are dead, their minor sons and their unmarried minor daughters.