STATE OF KERALA AND ORS. versus PHILOMINA ETC. ETC. & ORS.

Citation: [1977] 1 S.C.R. 273 · Decided: 20-08-1976 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.N. RAY · Disposal: Dismissed
Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

273 
STATE OF KERALA AND ORS. 
v. 
" 
PHILOMINA, ETC .. ETC. & ORS. 
-~. 
Au1<ust 20, 1976 
TA. N. RAY, C.J., M. H. BEG AND P. N. SHINGHAL, JJ.J 
Kera/a Land Reforms Act, 1963- S. 84-Scope of-Interpretation-When a . 
stature could be read retrospeotiv.ely. 
Section 84 of Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 declares that all voluntary 
transfers of land effected after the publication of the Kerala Land Reforms Bili 
en September 15, 1963, shall be null and void. 
Clause (ii) of this section 
which provided ·an exemption in respect of transfers made on account 
of 
"natural love and affection" was omitted in 1972 with retrospective effect from 
August 16, 1968. Section 81(1)(1) exempts kayal padasakharams of J(uttanad 
area from the restrictions on ownership prescribed by Chapter Ill of the Act. 
By an amendment of 1969, this exemption was witlidrawn; but the amending 
section was not brought into force until January l, 1970. 
There were two sets of petitions before the High Court. Jn one set the 
High Court held that ( 1) voluntary transfers of kayal lands effected between 
September 15, 1963 and January 1, 1970, were lawful and valid, and in the 
other (2) that certain transfers by way of gift were invalid. 
Jn the first set of appeals to this Court tire State contended that the 196!1 
amendment should bel given retrospective effect from April 1, 1964 i.e., the 
date on which s. 84 was brought into force and in the second set the done~ 
·contended that the transfers were saved because they were effected on account 
-<if natural love.· and affection. 
Dismissin0 all the appeals, 
HELD : (1 )(a) Even though by virtue of s. 84 all voiuhtaty 
transfers 
·effected after September 15, 1963 were invalid, transfers made in respect of 
kayal lands could not be held to be invalid because they were· exempt from the 
provisions of Chapter III. Though that exemption was withdrawn in 1969', 
that amendment was not brought into force until January 1, 1970. 
VoJuh-
tary transfers made between September 15, 1963 and January l, 19'70 
were 
therefore valid. [278 B-C] 
(b) The 1969 amendment was neither curative nor declaratory of the pre-
·vious Jaw. It merely omitted cl. (1) from s. 81. 
A statute is not to be 
read retrospectively except of necessity. There is ho such necessitv in the 
·instant cases, for the legislature decided to exempt kayal ]ands from the opera-
tion of the restrictions, and the 1969-amendment withdrawing the exemption 
was not brought into force until January J, 1970. [278 E-F] 
Pritam Singh Chahil v. State of Punjab and others. [1967] 
2 S.C.R. 
536 
and Channan Singh and another v. Jai Kaur [1970] 1 S.C.R. 803 held inappli-
cable. 
(2) In the other set of cases the impugned transfers were in favour of the 
doo0r's grand children by his daughter. who was alive and were effected bet-
ween January 1, 1970 and November 2, 19'72. It was held that it was futile 
to contend that s. 84 would not be attracted to the transfers on the ground 
that they were effected on account of natural love and affectioh within the 
·meaning of the .exemption provided by s. 84, because the exemption was taken 
away by Act 17 of 19,72 which specifically· stated that, that clause "9hal! be, 
and shall be deemed to have been omitted with effect from the 16th August, 
1968" and they could not be said to falJ within the exempted cateQ;ory b~cause 
of the amehdment made in s. 84 in 19721 restricting the exemption to gifts made 
1n favour of a donor's· son or daughter or the son of a daughter of his pre-
·d~ceased son or daughter. [279 A-CJ 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
274 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1977] 1 S.C.R. 
A 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeals Nos. 907-909/74_ 
B 
Appeals by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order dated 
27-3 .. 73 of the Kerala High Court in O.P. Nos. 375-377 /73 respect-
ively. 
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1354/75 
Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order dated 
9-7-75 of the Kerala High Court in C.R.P. No. 949/74. 
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1355/75 
Appeal by Sepecial Leave from the Judgment and Order 
dated· 
19-6-75 of the Kerala High Court in C.R.P. No. 611/74. 
M. M. Abdul, Advocate General for the State of Kerala, and K. M. 
C 
K. Nair for the Appellants in CAs. 907-909 /74 for rr. in CAs. 1854-
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
1855/75. 
.'hliJ!:l i 
T. S. Krishnamoorthy Iyer and P. K. Pillai; for the Appellants in 
CAs. 1354-1355/75. 
. 
Miss Lily Thomas for the Respondents in CAs. 908-909/74. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.