Civil Appeal No 1592 of 1969
Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order dated 12th March 1969 of the Madras High Court in Civil Rev Petition No 179167
K Jayaram and K Ramkumar for the Appellant
A V Rangam for the Respondent
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VENKATARAMIAH J
This appeal by special leave is filed against the order dated March 12 1969 passed in Civil Revision Petition No 1791 of 1967 on the file of the High Court of Madras
398 On the date of the commencement of the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms Fixation of Ceiling of Land Act 1961 hereinafter referred to as the Act  ie April 6 1960 the appellant owned approximately 47 acres of agricultural lands
He was required to file a statement under section 8 of the Act within 90 days from the date specified in the Notification issued by the Government in that behalf in respect of all lands held or deemed to have been held by him furnishing the particulars mentioned in that provision to the Authorised Officer within whose jurisdiction his holding or major part thereof was situated
Accordingly he filed his return
In the course of the enquiry the Authorised Officer found that under a will made by Sivagami Achi the mother of the appellant who died on April 20 1962 the appellant became entitled to 499 standard acres and his wife Devika got 881 standard acres of agricultural land
The Authorised Officer after ascertaining the true extents of the several bits of agricultural land held by the appellant on April 6 1960 exempted 221 acres of land under section 73 of the Act and determined the extent of surplus land which had to be surrendered by the appellant under the Act at 12803 standard acres on the basis that the appellant s family which included his wife was holding 44 46 acres as also the land which the appellant and his wife got under the will of Sivagami Achi
On the above basis he directed the final statement to be published under section 12 of the Act
Aggrieved by the order of the Authorised Officer the appellant filed an appeal before the Land Tribunal ie the Subordinate Judge of Thanjavur under section 78 of the Act contending inter alia that the extent of 881 standard acres which had been bequeathed in favour of his wife Devika by his mother Sivagami Achi under the will referred to above was stridhana land and had to be dealt with accordingly as required by section 5 4 a of the Act
The learned Subordinate Judge accepted the case of the appellant that the extent of 881 standard acres acquired by Devika on the death of Sivagami Achi should be allowed to be retained by her in addition to 30 standard acres
The case was however remitted back to the Authorised Officer for making a fresh determination of the surplus extent of land in accordance with the order passed in appeal
The State of Tamil Nadu filed a revision petition under section 83 of the Act before the High Court against the appellate order
The High Court allowed the revision petition holding that the extent of 881 standard acres acquired by Devika was not stridhana land  as defined under section 3 42 of the Act and could not be treated as such while determining the surplus land
The High Court further held that the land acquired by Devika was governed by section 211 read with section 102 b of the Act
This appeal is filed against the said order
399 In order to appreciate the submissions made on behalf of the parties before us it is necessary to refer briefly to some of the provisions of the Act
The Act was passed to provide for the fixation of ceiling on agricultural land holdings and for certain other matters connected therewith in the State of Tamil Nadu
Having regard to the limited extent of the area of agricultural land available for cultivation in that State the great disparity in the ownership of agricultural land leading to the concentration of such land in the hands of certain persons the need for reduction of such disparity in the ownership of agricultural land in that State and the necessity for fixing a ceiling on the Agricultural land holdings provisions were enacted in the Act fixing a ceiling on the agricultural land holdings and providing for acquisition of agricultural land in excess of the ceiling area and distribution of such land amongst the landless and other persons among the rural population
Section 311 of the Act defined the expression date of the commencement of this Act as the date on which the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms Fixation of Ceiling on Land Bill 1960 was published in the Fort St George Gazette namely the 6th day of April 1960
Section 334 of the Act defined the expression person as including any trust company family firm society or association of individuals whether incorporated or not
Under section 314 of the Act family  in relation to a person meant the person the wife or husband as the case may be of such person and his or her minor sons and unmarried daughters and minor grandsons and unmarried grand daughters in the male line whose father and mother were dead
Section 37 of the Act defined ceiling area as the extent of land which a person was entitled to hold under section 5
Section 342 of the Act defined stridhana land as any land held on the date of the commencement of the Act by any female member of a female in her own name
During the period in question the relevant part of section 5 of the Act read as follows 5
1a Subject to the provisions of Chapter VIII the ceiling area in the case of every person and subject to the provisions of sub sections 4 and 5 and of Chapter VIII the ceiling area in the case of every family consisting of not more than five members shall be 30 standard acres  400 4a Subject to the provisions of sub section 5 where the stridhana land held by any female member of a family together with the other land held by all the members of that family is in excess of 30 standard acres the female member concerned may hold in addition to the extent of land which the family is entitled to hold under sub section 1 stridhana land not exceeding 10 standard acres   Section 7 of the Act read as follows 7
On and from the date of the commencement of this Act no person shall except as otherwise provided in this Act but subject to the provisions of Chapter VIII be entitled to hold land in excess of the ceiling area Provided that in calculating the total extent of land held by any person any extent in excess of the ceiling area and not exceeding half an acre in the case of wet land and one acre in the case of dry land shall irrespective of the assessment of such land be excluded
 Section 21 of the Act read as follows 21
Ceiling on future acquisition by inheritance bequest or by sale in execution of decrees etc 1 If on or after the date of the commencement of this Act a any person acquires by inheritance or bequest from any person      any land which together with the land if any already held by him exceeds in the aggregate the ceiling area then he shall within ninety days from the notified date or from the date of such acquisition whichever is later furnish to the authorised Officer within whose jurisdiction his holding or the major part thereof is situated a return containing the following particulars namely     The lands which were bequeathed by Sivagami Achi the mother of the appellant under a will were held by her on the date of the commencement of the Act ie April 6 1960
The appellant married Devika on June 29 1960
Sivagami Achi died on April 20 1962 and on her death the appellant and Devika became entitled to the land bequeathed in their favour by her
The draft statement relating to the holding of the appellant was published on May 30 1965 and the Authorised Officer passed his order on March 14 1966 treating the lands bequeathed by Sivagami Achi in favour of the appellant and his 401 wife as part of the holding of the family consisting of the appellant and his wife
The case of the appellant before the Authorised Officer the Subordinate Judge and the High Court was that in view of section 5 4 a of the Act the ceiling area should have been fixed in his case at 30 standard acres plus the extent of land bequeathed in favour of his wife ie 881 standard acres
In this Court also the very same contention is urged
We are of the view that there is no substance in this contention
The expression stridhana land used in section 54 a has been given a restricted meaning by section 342 of the Act which defines it as any land held on the date of the commencement of the Act by any female member of a family in her own name
Admittedly on the date of the commencement of the Act ie April 6 1960 Devika was not the owner of the land in question
She acquired title to it only on April 20 1962 on the death of the testatrix
The appellant cannot therefore claim any benefit under section 54 a of the Act
Section 21 of the Act under which the land in question becomes liable to be included in the holding of the appellant for purposes of determination of the surplus land does not make any difference between stridhana property of a female acquired after the commencement of the Act by inheritance or bequest from any person and any other property held by her family
From a reading of the definition of the expression stridhana land in section 342 of the Act and the provisions of section 54 of the Act we are of opinion that the State Legislature intended to extend the concession available under section 54 of the Act only to the stridhana property held by a female on the date of the commencement of the Act and not to property acquired by her thereafter
It was urged by Mr K Jayaram learned counsel for the appellant that the Act was an expropriatory one and therefore we should construe section 5 4 a of the Act as being applicable to agricultural land acquired by a female even after the commencement of the Act
We do not think that there is any room for construing the said provision in that way
The object of the legislation as mentioned earlier was to acquire agricultural land in excess of the ceiling area from the holders thereof and to distribute the same amongst the landless among the rural population
If the construction urged by the appellant is placed on section 21 of the Act the very object of the statute would be defeated
If really the Legislature intended that lands acquired by way of inheritance or bequest by a female on or after the commencement of the Act should also be dealt with in accordance with section 54 it would have defined the expression stridhana land without the words on the date of the commencement of this Act
 It has also to be 402 borne in mind that the expression stridhana  is not used in the Act in the sense in which it is used in Hindu Law
The Act is applicable to Hindus as well as others governed by other personal laws
It is therefore reasonable to construe the expression stridhana land  as referring only to the land held by a female on the date of the commencement of the Act and not to lands inherited by her or acquired by her as a bequest at any subsequent point of time
The learned counsel for the appellant relied on the decision of the High Court of Madras in Valliammal vs The Authorised Officer Land Reforms Coimbatore in which a contention similar to the one urged before us on behalf of the appellant in this case had been accepted
The facts of that case were more or less similar to the facts in the case before us
The petitioner in that case was the wife of one Palanisami Gounder who was in possession of an extent of 44061 standard acres after excluding the exempted lands on the commencement of the Act
She inherited 11075 standard acres on the death of her son on March 25 1962
In the return filed by him the husband of the petitioner claimed that he was entitled to retain 30 standard acres as holding of the family and that his wife the petitioner in that case was entitled to hold 10 standard acres as stridhana property
The Land Tribunal Coimbatore held that since the Act defined stridhana land as meaning any land held on the date of the commencement of the Act by any female member of the family in her own name and since the petitioner therein had inherited the land on the death of her son only on March 25 1962 ie subsequent to the commencement of the Act she was not entitled to retain any land as stridhana property in addition to the extent of land which the family could retain under section 51
The petitioner questioned the correctness of the order of the Tribunal before the High Court of Madras in CRP No 916 of 1971
That petition was dismissed by Ganesan J on the ground that in view of the definition of stridhana land in section 3 42 of the Act the petitioner therein was not entitled to hold 10 standard acres as stridhana property in addition to the 30 standard acres allowed to the family consisting of herself and her husband
Thereafter a petition was filed before the High Court by the petitioner therein to review the order passed by Ganesan J
The review petition came up for decision before another learned Judge who allowed the same by his order dated November 2 1972
It is on the decision rendered on the review petition the reliance is placed by the appellant before us
In paragraph 6 of that decision it is observed as follows 403 The learned Judge who heard the civil revision petition mainly relied on the definition of stridhana property  for holding that no woman is entitled to hold any stridhana property if the same was acquired or inherited subsequent to the commencement of the Act
Of course section 342 defines stridhana land as meaning any land held on the date of commencement of the Act by any female member of a family in her own name
But that meaning is to be adopted unless the context otherwise requires 
It has been repeatedly held that the word in the section will have to be interpreted and understood in the context in which it is used in the section and the definition given for that word in the definition section of the Act could not always govern the interpretation without reference to the context
In the context of sections 5 7 and 21 and with reference to the scope and object of the Act I am of opinion that the properties inherited by females as stridhana property subsequent to the commencement of the Act are also entitled to the benefit of sub section 4 of section 5 of the Act
 It is true that the above passage supports the case of the appellant but we are of the view that in the context of section 21 of the Act it is not necessary to give a meaning to the expression stridhana land  different from what is stated in section 342 of the Act
For the reasons already stated by us we hold that the aforesaid decision does not lay down the law correctly
It is also to be observed that the earlier decision of the High Court of Madras which is now under appeal does not appear to have been brought to the notice of the learned Judge who decided the above case
We therefore hold that the High Court was right in this case in holding that section 5 4 of the Act was not applicable to the land in question
It was lastly urged by Mr K Jayaram that in view of certain subsequent amendments made to the Act the case has to be examined afresh by us in the light of the amended law
We do not think that it is advisable to do so at this stage
It is open to the appellant if he is so advised to resort to appropriate proceedings in order to claim the benefit that he may be entitled to under the amended law
Liberty is also reserved to the State Government to take whatever action it may take under the subsequent amendments to the Act
In the result this appeal fails and is dismissed with costs
NVK Appeal dismissed


Summary:
The Tamilnadu Land Reforms Fixation of Ceiling on Land Act 1961 by section 3 42 defined stridhana land as any land held on the date of the commencement of the Act April 6 1960 by any female member of a family in her own name and section 5 4a of the Act enabled such a female member to hold in addition to the extent of land which the family is entitled to hold stridhana land not exceeding 10 standard acres
The mother of the appellant had bequeathed to the appellant and his wife certain agricultural lands by a will
The appellant being married on June 29 1960 and his mother having died on April 20 1962 ie after the Act came into force the Authorised Officer passed orders treating the lands bequeathed in favour of the appellant s wife as part of the holdings of the family consisting of the appellant and his wife and determined the extent of the surplus land to be surrendered
The appellant s contention in his appeal under section 78 of the Act before the Land Tribunal that the land which was bequeathed in favour of his wife by his mother under the will was stridhana land was accepted by it and the Land Tribunal allowed the wife of the appellant to retain the land as stridhana land under section 5 4a of the Act and remitted back the case to the Authorised Officer for making a fresh determination of the surplus extent of the land
The respondent s revision petition under section 83 of the Act was allowed the High Court holding that the land held by the wife was not stridhana land  as defined under section 3 42 of the Act and could not be treated as such while determining the surplus land
On the question whether the land in question was stridhana land  and could be treated as such under section 5 4 of the Act while determining the surplus land
 HELD 1 The High Court was right in holding that section 5 4 of the Act was not applicable to the land in question
403 F 2 The expression stridhana land used in section 5 4 a has been given a restricted meaning by section 3 42 of the Act which defines it as any land held on the date of the commencement of the Act by any female member of a family in her own name
401C 397 In the instant case on the date of the commencement of the Act ie April 6 1960 the wife was not the owner of the land in question
She acquired title to it on April 20 1962 on the death of the testatrix her mother
The appellant cannot therefore claim any benefit under section 5 4 a of the Act
401C 3 section 21 of the Act under which the land in question becomes liable to be included in the holding of the appellant for purposes of determination of the surplus land does not make any difference between stridhana property of a female acquired after the commencement of the Act by inheritance or bequest from any person and any other property held by her family
401D 4 A reading of the definition of the expression stridhana land in section 3 42 of the Act and the provisions of section 54 of the Act indicate that the State Legislature intended to extend the concession available under section 5 4 of the Act only to the land held by a female on the date of the commencement of the Act and not to land acquired by her thereafter
401E 5 The object of the legislation is the acquisition of agricultural land in excess of the ceiling area and distribution of the same amongst the landless among the rural population
If the construction urged by the appellant is placed on section 21 of the Act the very object of the statute would be defeated
There is also no room for construing section 5 4 a of the Act as being applicable to agricultural land acquired by a female even after the commencement of this Act
401G F 6 If the Legislature intended that lands acquired by way of inheritance or bequest by a female on or after the commencement of the Act should also be dealt with in accordance with section 54 it would have defined the expression stridhana land without the words on the date of the commencement of this Act 401H 7 The Act is applicable to Hindus as well as others governed by other personal laws
This indicates that the expression stridhana  is not used in the Act in the sense in which it is used in Hindu law
402A Valliammal vs The Authorised Officer Land Reforms Coimbatore  over ruled