CHANDA Vs. SHEOKARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a plaintiff's first appeal from the judgment and decree by the Senior Civil Judge, Ganganagar dated 3-2-1967 by which he dismissed the plaintiff's suit for possession of a piece of agricultural land, situated in Chak No. II-K in District Ganganagar by preemption.

(2.) THE land in question measuring 361 Bighas and 14 Biswas was sold in different lots by defendant No. 1, Shrimati Roopa to defendants No. 2 to 5 for a consideration of Rs. 35,000/ -. THE plaintiff Smt. Chanda's case is that she and defendant No. 1 Smt. Roopa are the co-widows of the deceased Lakhuram who died on Migsar Bad 4, S. 2013 leaving behind 75 Bighas of land. It was alleged that the sale of land in question had been effected as a matter of fact for Rs. 10,000/- only and Rs. 35,000/- were shown as fictitious price in the sale deeds. It was further pleaded that since the death of Lakhu Ram took place after the coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (which for the sake of brevity will be hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') she was entitled to get possession of the land in question from the defendants Nos. 2 to 5 on payment of Rs. 10,000/- only.

(3.) IN our opinion, the words of sec. 22 (1) are crystal clear and show that the section is intended to be prospective and has no retrospective operation. The use of the words 'after the commencement of this Act' is highly suggestive and shows that the section applies only where succession has opened after the coming into force of the Act. The date of the devolution is material and in order that the section may apply, the devolution must take place after the commencement of the Act and that would happen only where a person dies after the Act came into force. Reference may be made to Gulab Chand vs. Sheo Charan Lall (1), wherein it was observed that there cannot be any manner of doubt that the provisions of sec. 22 are prospective and cannot be taken advantage of by the widows or persons who died before the commencement of this Act.