SANTOKHU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a plaintiff's appeal from the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge of Mandi dated 27 11 1951 allowing the appeal of the defendant, the State of Himachal Pradesh, and dismissing the suit of the plaintiffs for possession of certain land.

(2.) THE land in suit originally belonged to one Fattu and on his death his widow Mt. RBonku succeeded to it with a life interest. Mt. Ronku died on 20th Katik 2001 B. (corresponding roughly 1944 A. D.). On 14 10 1948 the Deputy Commissioner of Mandi passed an order escheating the land to the Government. The present suit was thereupon filed on 9 6 1951 by the three daughters of Mt. Ronku by Pattu for the aforesaid relief.

(3.) ON an appeal by the defendant State, the learned District Judge reversed the decision of the trial Court on the finding that the new laws, which came into force on 25 12 1948, were not applicable in the present case, and that under the old law which was applicable daughters had no right to succeed. The lower appellate Court was clearly in error in holding that there was any new law which came into force on 25 12 1948 governing the facts of the present case. That was the date on which the Himachal Pradesh (Application of Laws) Order tame into force. A Schedule was appended to this Order containing certain Central and Punjab Acts. By Section 3 of the Order those enactments were applied to Himachal Pradesh. Section 7 laid down that all laws previously in force in Himachal Pradesh corresponding to the said enactments stood repealed. The only enactment which the learned counsel for the defendant respondent could point out was Section 19 of the Mandi Land Revenue Regulation No. VIII of Section 1975. If that provision, be applicable, there is no doubt that it stood repealed since 25 12 1948 because of the enforcement in Himachal Pradesh of the corresponding law as contained in the Punjab Land Revenue Act. The learned Government Advocate however conceded that Section 19 of the said Regulation laid down a rule of succession applicable only in the case of collaterals but not in the case of lineal descendants of the last male holder, as for example a son or daughter. It is manifest therefore that by the passing of the Application of Laws Order there was no old law prevalent in the former State of Mandi which stood repealed. The disposal of the present case by the learned Dis trial Judge therefore on the ground of the repeal or otherwise of any old law on 25 12 1948 was erroneous.