Satish Chandra, J. - (1.) IN pur suance of a notice under Section 10 (2) of the Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act. 1960. Smt. Vidya Wati, respondent filed an objection that her sons were tenure-holders in their own separate rights within meaning of the Act and their share of the holding can not be taken into consideration while declaring her ceiling area. This objection was rejected by the Prescribed Authority and the finding was upheld in appeal by the learned District Judge, Bijnor. Smt. Vidya Wati instituted a writ petition. A learned single Judge upheld her contention that the primary question to be determined was whether the sons of Smt. Vidya Wati were hold ers of a holding in their own separate right or not. This question was not determined by the authorities below. On this view the writ petition was allowed and the matter was sent back for decision afresh. Aggrieved, the State has come up in appeal.
(2.) THE finding is that Smt. Vidya Wati and her two sons are record ed jointly over the holdings in dispute. The records do not carry any specifica tion of the shares of the three co-sharers. The question is whether the entire holding can be taken into consi deration while determining the ceiling area of the respondent Smt. Vidya Wati. Section 4 of the Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act provides that the ceiling area applicable to a tenure-holder shall be calculated after taking into account all the land in any holding in the State held by him. in his own right, whether in his own name or ostensibly in the name of any other person. Section 5 provides a limit to a tenure-holder from holding land in ex cess of the ceiling area applicable to him. Sub-section (2) thereof states that in determining the ceiling area applicable to a person at the commencement of this Act. any transfer or partition of land made after the twentieth day of August. 1959 which but for the trans fer or partition would have been de clared surplus land under the provi sions of this Act. shall be ignored and not taken into account. It will thus be seen that the entity whose ceiling area has to be determined is the tenure-holder. A partition in the family of such a tenure- holder, which may have taken place after the 20th day of August, 1959. has to be ignored for purposes of determining the ceiling area of the tenure-holder.
(3.) CLAUSE (1) of Section 3 of the Act defines "tenure-holder" to mean an individual or a person who is the holder of a holding. Clause (f) defines a "per son" to include the family. Thus a family can also be a tenure-holder for the purposes of this Act.;