MAKINENI VENKATA SUJATHA versus LAND REFORMS TRIBUNAL AND ANR.

Citation: [2000] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 15 · Decided: 17-10-2000 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M. JAGANNADHA RAO · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

MAKINEN! VENKATA SUJATHA 
v. 
LAND REFORMS TRIBUNAL AND ANR. 
OCTOBER 17, 2000 
[M. JAGANNADHA RAO AND K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ.] 
Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 
1973: 
A 
B 
Ss. 4A, 18 and 29A-Declarationfiled by tenure holder on 11.4.1975- C 
Excess land with him as on 1.1.1975 determined-Proceedings pending-
Daughter of tenure holder, who was minor on 1.1.1975 and was included in 
father's family unit, filing application before Land Reforms Tribunal in I 987 
claiming coparcenary. right-Alternatively she claimed right at par with a 
major son and contended that father's holding would get diminished to that D 
extent and he need not to have surrender excess land-Held, the daughter 
of the declarant was minor as on 1.1.1975--She being part offather'sfamily, 
has no duty nor a right to file a separate declaration-Subsequent event of 
shares increasing was not relevant. 
Utukuri Sarat Kumar v. Authorised Officer, (1998) 1 ALT 496, approved. E 
Kancherla Madhusudhana Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh, JT (2000) 
8 SC 244, relied on. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Special Leave Petition (Civil) 
No. 15354 of2000. 
F 
From the Judgment of Order dated 28.6.2000 of the Andhra Pradesh 
High Court in C.R.P. No. 1957of1994. 
P.P. Rao and Ms. C.K. Sucharita for the Petitioner. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
M. JAGANNADHA RAO, J. The Special Leave Petition (C) No. 15354/ 
2000 was dismissed at the stage of admission by an order dated 29,9.2000 after 
hearing learned Senior counsel for the petitioner. It was stated in that order 
that reasons would follow later. The following is the reasoned order. 
15 
G 
H 
16 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2000]SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 
A 
The petitioner is the daughter of the 2nd respondent. The 2nd 
respondent had filed a declaration under the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms 
(Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (Act No. I of 1973). The notified 
date under the Act with respect to which the ceiling of a declarant for his 
family unit had to be determined was 1.1.1975. The 2nd respondent filed a 
declaration on 11.4.1975 (L.C.C. 2516, 2517/KDK/75). The petitioner was minor 
B as on 1.1.1975 and she was included in the family unit of her father, the 
declarant. It was determined that the father's family unit had excess land to 
be surrendered. At that stage, the petitioner filed an' application before the 
Land Reforms Tribunal in 1987 in the land ceiling proceedings pertaining to 
her father claiming that by virtue of Section 29A as introduced by the A.P. 
C Amendment Act 13/86 to the Hindu Succession Act (Act 30/56) as inserted 
w.e.f 5.9.1985, the petitioner had become a coparcener being unmarried on 
that date (she got married on 26.8.1986), and therefore had equal rights as a 
son. It was contended that her father's holding would therefore get diminished 
and he need not have to surrender excess land. Alternatively, she also relied 
on Section 4A introduced in Andhra Pradesh Land (Ceiling on Agricultural 
D Holdings) Act, 1973 by the Andhra Pradesh Amendment Act 10 of 1977 
w .e.f. 1.1.1975 claiming that she was in the position of a major son and was 
entitled to the share of a major son. It was contended that to that extent, 
the father would be entitled to an extra unit and need not have to surrender 
any excess land. 
E 
F 
These two contentions were rejected by the Land Reforms Tribunal on 
20.5.1988, and on appeal by the Appellate Tribunal in LRA/88 on 23.3.1994. 
The Civil Revision Petition I 957 /I 994 filed by her was dismissed on 28.6.2000 
by the High Court. This special leave petition was preferred against the said 
order. 
We shall deal initially with the contention based on section 29A 
introduced into the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 by the AP Amendment of 
1986. The Andhra Pradesh Land Ceiling Act (Act 1 of 1973) Act was published 
in Andhra Pradesh Gazette on 1.1.1973. Under the Act, the determination of 
G the retainable area of agricultural land was to be done with reference to the 
land held by the 'family unit' on 1.1.1975. The 'family unit' was defined in 
section 2(f) as comprising the individual, his or her spouse or spouses and 
their minor sons and their unmarried minor daughters. The petitioner before 
us was a member of the family unit as she was an unmarried minor daughter 
of the 2nd respondent as on 1.1..1975. The declarant, her father under Section 
H 8 was obliged to declare the total land held by himself and those lan

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.