SURBUDDIN AND ANR.versusSTATE OF KERALA AND ANR.
- Citation
- 1995 INSC 72
- Decided
- 23 January 1995
- Disposal
- Appeal(s) allowed
Holding
A joint claim filed by husband and wife includes claims for each spouse’s respective holdings, obligating the State to grant compensation to the wife as well.
Summary
The husband and wife’s land was acquired under the Kerala Land Reforms Act. They filed a joint claim statement for compensation, but only the husband received compensation. The wife appealed the decision, arguing that the joint claim also covered her separate holding. The Kerala High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that no separate claim was made by the wife. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, ruling that a joint claim filed by spouses includes claims for each spouse’s respective holdings, and therefore the State must compute and award compensation to the wife as well. The Court directed the competent authority to determine the compensation due to the wife and ordered no costs.
Issues considered
- Whether a joint claim statement filed by a husband and wife under the Land Reforms Act constitutes a separate claim for each spouse’s respective holdings.
- Whether the State is obligated to award compensation to the wife when only the husband was granted compensation.
Legislation cited
Subjects
Judgment
f
i
SURBUDDIN AND ANR. A
.....,.. v.
STATE OF KERALA AND ANR.
JANUARY 23, 1995
(K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.] B
J - Land Refonns Act-Joint claim statement by husband and wife-Only
husband granted compensation-Joint claim for respective holdin15Wife too
has to be granted compensation.
Land of husband and wife was taken over under the Land Reforms
c
Act. They jointly filed their claim statement. Only husband was awarded
compensation. Wife appealed. The High Court dismissed the appeal hold-
ing that no separate claim had been made by the wife.
.... Allowing the appeal, this Court
~ D
HELD : Wife and husband jointly laid the claim. They both made
the claim in respect of their respective holdings. State shall compute and
grant the compensation payable to the wife in respect of the land held by
her. [534-C]
E
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1017 of
1995.
From the Judgment and Order dated 16.7.84 of the Kerala High
-t
Court in L.A.A. No. 266 of 1970.
F
E.M.S. Anam for the Appellants.
M.T. George for the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
G
Leave granted.
~,.
Notice itself was issued to the husband and the wife for making their
claim for lands respectively held by them which was taken over under the
Land Reforms Act. They also filed jointly their claim statement as indi-
cated in the statement filed in this Court. In that view of the matter, the H
533
)
534 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995) 1 S.C..R.
A Tribunal should have granted to both the claimants the compensation for
the lands respectively held by the husband as well as the wife. Since the
wife was not separately awarded while granting the compensation to the
husband, when the appeal was filed, the High Court of Kerala in the
impugned order dated July 6, 1984 in LAA No. 266/78 dismissing the
B appeal on the ground that there was no separate claim made by the wife.
The High Court was wrong in coming to the conclusion that the claim was
not made by the wife. She and her husband jointly laid the claim and so it
would be that they both made the claim in respect of their respective
holdings. In that situation, the State should have granted compensation to
the lands respectively held by them.
c ·The,. appeal is accordingly allowed. The competent authority is
directed to compute the compensation payable to the wife in respect of the
land held by her. No costs.
A.G. Appeal allowed.
+
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.