ANCESTRAL PROPERTY CANNOT BE SOLD BY NON-LEGAL HEIR - SC

ANCESTRAL PROPERTY CANNOT BE SOLD BY NON-LEGAL HEIR - SC

BY - DEEPAKSHI BHALLA 

BACKGROUND

Radhanath Kumhar was the owner of agricultural land and a house in Mouza Nalita. Radhanath Kumhar died intestate i.e. died without a will, and his property passed onto his legal heirs and descendants. After the death of Mangal Kumhar, the grandson of Radhanath Kumhar, his widow Etwari Kumharin professed to sell the suit property. Legal Heir of Sonu and Anand(Sonu and Anand are sons of Radhanath Kumhar) filed a case against Etwari Kumharin on the ground that the suit property was Ancestral Property and Etwari Kumharin had no Etwari Kumharin had no right to sell it.

READ ALSO : POCSO: Accused convicted within a month of filing charge sheet

CURRENT ISSUE

A case was filed against Etwari Kumharin by the legal heirs of late Radhanath Kumhar. According to the plaintiffs, the defendant being non- Legal Heir had no right to sell the suit property as it was Ancestral Property. For this, the plaintiffs had bought a suit against the defendant to stop her from selling the suit property. The plaintiffs also said that she also did not have any right as the property as not self-acquired by Mangal Kumhar. 

Defendant on her part put the claim that Mangal Kumhar was the recorded tenant in the suit property, the suit property was his self-acquired. The trial court gave the judgement in the favour of the plaintiffs. It was held that the suit property was a part of the joint family property of the common ancestors Radhanath Kumhar. Since there was no will i.e. partition of properties owned by Radhanath Kumhar, the widow of Mangal Kumhar( the defendant) had no right of selling it. Moreover share of Mangal Kumhar was not specified, hence he could not be considered the sole owner of the suit property. The court considered the sale deed void and illegal as Etwari Kumharin did not have any exclusive rights in the suit property and had not interest in the suit property. Aggrieved by the judgement Etwari Kumharin filed second appeal before the Jharkhand High Court, this appeal was dismissed on the ground that no substantial question of law had arisen for consideration. Again Etwari Kumharin filed the special leave petition. The Court found that Etwari Kumharin had failed to prove that the suit property was self-acquired of Mangal Kumhar. The bench comprising Justice Indu Malhotra and Justice Krishna Murari noted that such enteries only enable the person in whose favour mutation is recorded, to pay the land revenue in respect of land in question.

READ ALSO : ACT OF REGISTRY IS NOT AN ACT OF COURT

CONCLUSION

Record entries only enable the person in whose mutation is recorded, to pay the land revenue in respect of land in question. Record entries are no proof that the person is the owner of land. So the sale deed is illegal and void. Etwari Kumharin had no right to sell the suit property.