(A) Central Provinces Laws Act (20 of 1875) , S.6— Repealed enactment – Applicability – Central Provinces Laws Act, 1875 – High Court had held that since Central Provinces Laws Act, 1875 was repealed in 2018, same could not be applied to present case of claim for partition of maternal grandfather’s property by heirs of woman belonging to Scheduled Tribe – S. 4 of Repeal Act of 2018 Act provides that no right having been accrued prior to the repeal of the Act shall be affected – Parties not being governed by Hindu or Muslim laws would be covered by S. 6 of the 1875 Act – Right in favour of plaintiffs’ mother had crystallized upon death of her father, which was approximately 30 years before filing of plaint – Act ought to have been applied.
ILR 2022 Chh 1886 (CHH)-Reversed(Paras 1718)
(B) Central Provinces Laws Act (20 of 1875) , S.6— Constitution of India , Art.014— Succession -.Rights of female heirs – Plaintiffs legal heirs of woman belonging to Scheduled Tribe sought partition of property belonging to their maternal grandfather – Suit was dismissed on ground that plaintiffs failed to establish that children of female heir were also entitled to property – Neither any particular law of a community nor custom could be brought into application by either party – Principles of justice, equity and good conscience would have to applied – Said principles find recognition in the Central Provinces Laws Act, 1875 – If view of lower courts was upheld, woman or her successors, would be denied right to property on basis of absence of positive assertion to such inheritance in custom – However, customs too, like law, cannot remain stuck in time and cannot be allowed to be applied to deprive persons of their rights – Further, there was no rational nexus or reasonable classification for only males to be granted succession, more so in case where no prohibition to such effect can be shown to be prevalent as per law – Art. 14 includes aspect of gender equality – Considering principles of justice, equity and good conscience, along with overarching effect of Art. 14, plaintiffs were entitled to their equal share in property of their maternal grandfather
ILR 2022 Chh 1886 (CHH)-ReversedAIR 2017 SC 4609-FollowedAIR 2003 SC 3331-Relied on(Paras 19202728)