Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Revision Side No. 120 of 1956‑57, decided on 6th March 1957, District Montgomery.
S. 21 (b)‑--Words "If the tenancy were agricultural land acquired by the original tenant"‑--Applicable sometimes to cases in which distinction is made between self‑acquired and ancestral properties--- Not applicable to Christian tenants.
Joshua Fazal Din for Petitioner.
Khurshid, who inherited a share in the tenancy granted under the Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912, has died and his share in the tenancy has devolved on his sister Khurshid Bibi. This is in accordance with the rules of inheritance governing Christian families under the Succession Act.
The petitioner, who also has a share in the same tenancy, is the daughter of the original tenant and should in fact have been accepted as the sole heir at the time of his death. This aspect of the case gives rise to a moral claim in her favour. But it is not permissible to act on her moral claims at this late stage when she did not ask for a change in the original order of the Collector giving a part of the inheritance of the original tenant to other relatives.
The words " if the tenancy were agricultural land acquired by the original tenant " uSed in clause (b) of section 21 of the Act, do not make any difference in the present case. These words do not mean that we have now to find a successor of the original tenant. These words can sometimes make a difference where the law applicable to the parties makes a distinction between ancestral and self‑ acquired property.
For the above reasons, I am satisfied that the order passed by the Collector and confirmed by the Commissioner is not in correct. I, therefore, dismiss this petition for revision.
A. H. Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer