BHAGWANDAS Vs. GAJADHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS 2nd appeal raises a question of the interpretation of a statute. A brief statement of the facts is necessary. One Girdhari held the land in suit as occupancy tenant under the plaintiff-respondent. He died issueless and was succeeded by his widow. On her death his holding was taken up by his sister Mt. Sita who was recognized by the landlord as the tenant of the land in suit. It is common ground that the tenancy right was personal property or stridhan in her hands. On her death the defendants who are proved to be her husband's sagotra sapindas within seven degrees of kindred to him took possession of her lands. The plaintiff as the landlord of the holding sues to eject them as trespasser on the ground that the tenancy lapsed to him for want of heirs and that the defendants are not collateral heirs of his tenant Mt. Sita within the meaning of Section 11, proviso (ii) of the new C.P. Tenancy Act of 1920.

(2.) THE first Court dismissed the suit holding that the tenancy did not lapse but legally devolved on the defendants. On appeal by plaintiff the lower appellate Court reversed the decision and granted a decree for possession, in the view that though defendants were the collateral heirs of Mt. Sita's husband they were not her collaterals and as such were excluded from inheritance under the 2nd proviso to Section 11 of the Act. The defendants have therefore come up in 2nd appeal.

(3.) IT is common ground between the parties and also clear from Section 12(1) of the C.P. General Clauses Act 1 of 1914 that unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context words importing the masculine gender shall be taken to include females. It therefore follows that the provisions of Section 11 are to be read as applicable to male as well as female tenants, mutatis mutandis. The interest of a female occupancy tenant must consequently on her death pass by inheritance in accordance with her personal law. This personal law for a married Hindu female tenant who owns her tenancy in absolute right must necessarily be that branch of Hindu Law which governs devolution of a married woman's stridhan according to the school to which she belongs. Her heirs must therefore be from amongst the class of heirs who are entitled to succeed to her other stridhan property under the Hindu Law applicable to her.