JUDGEMENT
R.F.NARIMAN,J. -
(1.) This appeal has come to us owing to a difference of opinion between Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J. and K.M. Joseph, J. in a judgment dated
29.08.2019.
(2.) The brief facts necessary to appreciate the controversy in this appeal are as follows: a partition deed dated 31.01.1970 (duly registered on
1.07.1970) was executed between late Shri Vithaldas Jagannath Khatri and his minor son and three minor daughters. In terms of this
document, the agricultural land of the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF)
is sought to be divided by mentioning that parties two to five - who are
the four children of Vithaldas - have to be provided expenses for their
education and marriage, which will be borne out of the separate
property allotted to each. An earlier partition deed was executed
between Vithaldas and his father Jagannath on 20.01.1955. Separate
provision was made in favour of the wife of Vithaldas by means of a
gift deed of land in her favour.
(3.) At this stage, it is necessary to set out certain provisions of 'The Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961'
(hereinafter referred to as the "1961 Act"). Section 2(4) of the 1961 Act
defines 'appointed day' as meaning the day on which the 1961 Act
comes into force, which is 26.01.1962. Section 2(6A) defines
'commencement date' as meaning the 2nd day of October, 1975.
Section 2(11) defines 'family' as follows:
"(11) "family" includes, a Hindu undivided family, and in the case of other persons, a group or unit, the members of which by custom or usage, are joint in estate or possession or residence;" Section 2(11-A) defines 'family unit' as follows: "(11-A) "family unit" means a family unit as explained in section 4;" ;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.