In a significant judgment of Tirith Kumar & Others v/s Daduram & Others, the Supreme Court of India addressed a contentious property dispute involving tribal communities and the applicability of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (HSA, 1956). The appeal, originating from the High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur, focused on whether the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act could apply to the parties in the case, who were members of the Sawara tribe, a recognized scheduled tribe. The Court's decision, which delves into the intersection of law, custom, and equity, not only clarifies the applicability of the Hindu Succession Act but also provides a nuanced perspective on how tribal customs and principles of justice, equity, and good conscience can influence legal outcomes.
Factual Background:
The dispute in question revolves around the ownership of a 13.95-acre plot of land in Bagri Pali village, originally belonging to a common ancestor named Chuchrung. The legal heirs of Chuchrung's son, Puni Ram, sought a declaration to establish their ownership over the property, while the defendants—descendants of Chuchrung's other son, Mardan—claimed their share.
The trial court found that both parties had adopted Hindu customs and practices, thereby governing themselves by Hindu law in matters of inheritance. It was established that Mardan had died in 1951, before the Hindu Succession Act came into force, which meant his daughters did not have any inheritance rights over the property. The defendants were found to have no legal rights over the land, and the plaintiffs (descendants of Puni Ram) were declared the rightful owners.
However, the High Court overturned this ruling, citing that the Sawara tribe, being a notified scheduled tribe under Article 342 of the Constitution, was not governed by the Hindu Succession Act unless specifically de-notified by the central government. The court further observed that the plaintiffs had not sufficiently demonstrated that they had abandoned their tribal customs and embraced Hindu law, and thus, tribal customs should apply.
Legal Issue: Applicability of the Hindu Succession Act to Scheduled Tribes
The core issue in this case was whether the Hindu Succession Act applied to members of the Sawara tribe. The Hindu Succession Act explicitly excludes scheduled tribes unless the Central Government issues a notification bringing them under its provisions. Section 2(2) of the Act states that it does not apply to members of any Scheduled Tribe as defined in Article 366(25) of the Constitution, unless a notification to the contrary is issued by the government.
In this case, the High Court noted that no such notification had been produced to demonstrate that the Sawara tribe had been de-notified from the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act. Therefore, the High Court concluded that the Act was not applicable to the tribe.
The High Court's Application of Justice, Equity, and Good Conscience:
Despite the fact that the Hindu Succession Act did not apply, the High Court turned to the principles of justice, equity, and good conscience to determine the property rights of the parties. The Court referred to Section 6 of the Central Provinces Laws Act, 1875, which provided that when no custom or law could be applied, the courts should decide based on justice, equity, and good conscience.
In its judgment, the High Court invoked this principle to grant a portion of the disputed property to Mardan’s daughters and their descendants. The court held that despite the absence of a notification applying the Hindu Succession Act, it was necessary to ensure fairness and equity in the distribution of property, acknowledging the changing social realities and the need for gender equality in inheritance.
The Supreme Court's Consideration and Findings:
On appeal, the Supreme Court reiterated that the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, explicitly excluded members of scheduled tribes from its purview unless specifically notified by the central government. The Court cited previous judgments, including Madhu Kishwar vs. State of Bihar (1996), to underline that the Act does not apply to tribal communities unless amended by a notification. The absence of such a notification in this case meant that the Sawara tribe remained outside the ambit of the Hindu Succession Act.
However, the Supreme Court acknowledged that the principles of justice, equity, and good conscience could still be applied to ensure a just outcome. The Court relied on precedents, including M. Siddiq (Ram Janmabhumi Temple-5 J.) vs. Suresh Das (2020) and Saraswathi Ammal vs. Jagadambal (1953), where courts invoked these principles in the absence of a clear legal framework. The Court concluded that while the Hindu Succession Act did not apply, the daughters of Mardan and their descendants were entitled to a share in the property, based on the principles of justice and equity.
The Court's Final Observations:
The Court also emphasized that the rights of female members in tribal communities should be given due consideration. In a separate but relevant case, the Court had previously suggested that the Central Government should consider amending the Hindu Succession Act to extend equal inheritance rights to women in scheduled tribes. Although the present case did not directly address this issue, the Court reiterated this recommendation, calling for a legislative review to ensure parity in property inheritance for female tribals, as guaranteed under the Constitution's equality provisions.
Conclusion:
In dismissing the appeal, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision, emphasizing the need for decisions grounded in justice, equity, and good conscience. The ruling clarified the non-applicability of the Hindu Succession Act to scheduled tribes unless specifically amended and highlighted the importance of ensuring fair and equal treatment in property succession cases, especially for women in tribal communities.
The case underscores the evolving nature of legal interpretation, where courts may rely on principles of equity when statutory law falls short or does not fully address a particular issue. This judgment also serves as a call to action for the government to review the legal provisions governing tribal succession and inheritance to ensure that gender equality and justice are upheld for all citizens, regardless of their community or background.
Hindu Succession Act, 1956
