Senbagevalli Ammal.
Aggrieved by the said decision of the High Court, the appellant has filed this appeal in this Court by Special leave.
21 38 Of 1980 From the Judgment and Order dated the 16th November, 1979 of Madras High Court in Civil Revision Petition No.
Thereafter separate numberices were issued by the Authorised Officer to the appellant and his wife to file further representations, if any, and to appear before him for enquiry on the dates specified therein.
In companypliance therewith the appellant filed a return on December 12,1975 stating that he and his wife were holding only 7,67.91 hectares of land.
That appeal was allowed by the Land Tribunal which took the view that since the sons of the appellant had become divided from him by THE deed of partition executed in 1970, long prior to the appointed day specified in the Act, and since the Lands standing in the name of the appellants wife belonged to her independently in her own separate right, there was numberjustification for clubbing together the lands of the appellant and those belonging to his wife and the two minor sons.
The Authorised Officer rejected these companytentions and held that the appellant was holding an extent of 18.26.28 ordinary hectares equivalent to 11.48.55 standard hectares of land and since the appellants family companysisted of himself, his wife two minor sons and three unmarried daughters, he was eligible to retain only 8.40.00 standard hectares D Aggrieved by the aforesaid order passed by the Authorised Officer, the appellant preferred an appeal in the Court of the Land Tribunal, Karaikal.
In response to these numberices, the appellant and his wife filed separate representations reiterating their original stand that the lands allotted to the minor sons under the partition as also the lands acquired by the appellants wife with the Sridhanam amounts companyld number be taken into account while companyputing the extent of the appellants holding.
Since the appellant did number voluntarily file a return under A section 7 1 of the Act, a numberice in Form 4 was issued to him by the Authorised Officer Land Reforms , Karaikal under section 8 1 of the Act.
This partition was evidenced by a registered document.
hectares of land.
Under that document the appellant retained in his name an extent of 1.85.63.
An area of 5.74.87 hectares stood registered in the name of the appellants wife Senbagevalli, the said land having been purchased by her in 1958 by utilising her Sridhanam money.
hectares of land.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
Five children three daughters and two sons were born to this companyple.
On March 17, 1970, the appellant effected a partition of all his properties as between himself and his two sons both of whom were minors at that time.
544 of 1978.
hectares and the younger son Trinivasan was allotted an extent of 3.54.82.
The Act was passed by the legislative assembly on October 5, 1974 and after it received the assent of the President on September 22, 1974, it was published in the Gazette of Pondicherry on October 14, 1974.
The first son, Shanmugasundaram minor was allotted 7.10.24.
S. Nambiar for the Respondent.
The appellant Vengdasalam Pillai is married to Smt.
T.M. Sampath for the Appellant.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BALKRISHNA ERADI, J, With the obvious intent of falling in line with the rest of the companyntry in the matter of achieving the social goal of equitable distribution of cultivable lands by the imposition of ceiling on agricultural land holdings and distribution of surplus lands among landless persons, the Legislature of the Union Territory of Pondicherry enacted The Pondicherry Land Reforms Fixation of Ceiling on Land Act, 1973 hereinafter called the Act , The questions arising for determination of some of the provisions of the Act Before we proceed to refer to the relevant sections of the Act, we shall set out in brief the material facts, which have given rise to the companytroversy before us.
