KARSAN AMBUBHAI SINDHAV versus THE STATE OF GUJARAT

Citation: [1994] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 205 · Decided: 30-11-1994 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, N. VENKATACHALA · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

--. 
KARSAN AMBUBHAI SINDHA V 
v. 
THE STATE OF GUJARAT 
NOVEMBER 30, 1994 . 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.] 
Gujarat Agricultural Land Ceiling Act, 1960: 
Section 6(38)-Family-Meaning for the purpose of determining the 
ceiling. 
-
The appellant and his minor son constituted the family. Under the 
provisions of the Gujarat Agricultural land Ceiling Act, 1960, the 
Tribunal, after excluding the ceiling area of 54 acres, computed 18 
acres 23-3/4 gunthas to be excess land. Appellant claimed that his 
father, mother and other members were residing with him. They being 
A 
B 
c 
the members o( joint family, they were entitled to separate unit, and D 
thus he was not having land in excess of the ceiling area. This was not 
accepted by the Tribunal. The High Court confirmed the Tribunal's 
finding. Hence this appeal. 
Dismissing the appeal, this Court 
HELD : 1.1. By operation of the definition as contained in Section 
6(3B) of the Gujarat Agricultural Land Ceiling Act, 1960 for the 
purpose of ceiling, the computation shall be made only in accordance 
with the definition given iinder the Act. In that definition, apart from 
himself, other members belonging to the family are only his minor son 
E 
or son of a pre-deceased son and son or daughter of a pre-deceased son F 
where the widow of the pre-deceased son died. [206 H, 207 A) 
1.2. In the instant case, admittedly the appellant is having only 
himself and his minor son constituting the family. His father, mother, 
brothers and sisters though may be living with him, they are not 
members of the family much less his joint family and that, therefore, G 
they are not entitled to any additional computation of the arrears to the 
extent of 1/5th of the ceiling area for each member in excess of five, so 
however that the total holding of the family does not exceed twice the 
ceiling area. Thereby, one unit was given to the appellant of an extent 
of 54 acres and he is liable to surrender 18 acres 28-3/4 gunthas which 
was found to ue excessive. (207 BJ 
H 
205 
206 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1994] SUPP. 6 S.C.R 
A 
CIVIL AP PELLA TE JUR1SDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 3687 of 
1984. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 10-9-81 of the Gujarat High Court 
in L.P.A. No. 32of1980. 
B 
· S.C. Patel for the Appellant. 
c 
.. Anip Sachthey and C.B. Babu for the Respondent.· 
The following Order of the Court was delive.red : 
This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the High 
Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in L.P.A. No. 32/1980, dated 10-9-1981. 
. Section 6 (3B) of the Gujarat Agricultural Land Ceiling Act, 1960 
defines 'family' as : 
"Where a family or a joint family consist of more than five 
D 
members comprising a person and other members belonging 
to all or any of any of the following categories, namely:-
E 
F 
(i) 
minor son, 
(ii) widow of a pre-deceased son, 
(iii) minor son or unmarried daughter of a pre-deceased son, 
where his or her mother is dead, such family shall be entitled 
to hold land in excess of the ceiling area to the extent of one-
fifth of the ceiling area for each member in excess of five, so 
however that the total holding of the family doesn't exceed 
twice the ceiling area; and in such a case, in relation to the 
holding of such family, such area shall be deemed to be the 
ceiling area." 
It is an admitted fact that the appellant has a minor son and himself 
constitute the family. The Tribunal, therefore, after excluding the ceiling 
G 
area of 54 acres, computed 18 acres 23-3/4 gunthas to be excess· land. The 
appellant claimed that his father, mother and other members etc. are 
residing with him, they are the members of joint family and that, therefore, 
they are entitled to separate unit, thereby he is not having in excess of the 
ceiling area. That contention was negatived by the Tribunal as well as by 
the High Court. It is seen that by operation of the above definition, for the 
H 
purpose of ceiling, the computation shall be made only in accordance with 
·--
K. A. SINDHAV v. STATE OF GUJARAT 
207 
the definition given under the Act. In that definition, apart fi:om himself, A 
other members belonging to the family are only his minor son or son. of a 
pre-deceased son and son. or daughter of a pre-deceased son where the 
widow of the pre-deceased son died. In this case, admittedly, he is- having 
only himself and his minor son constituting the family. His father, mother, 
brothers and sisters though may be living with him, they are
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.