TIRITH KUMAR & ORS.versusDADURAM & ORS.

                [2024] 12 S.C.R. 665 : 2024 INSC 1005

                            Tirith Kumar & Ors.
                                     v.
                              Daduram & Ors.
                      (Civil Appeal No. 13516 of 2024)
                              19 December 2024
              [C.T. Ravikumar and Sanjay Karol,* JJ.]


                            Issue for Consideration
       Whether the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 could be applied to the
       parties to the instant lis.

                                  Headnotes†
       Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – s.2(2) – Application of the Act –
       Constitution of India – Articles 366(25), 341, 342 – Central
       Provinces Laws Act, 1875 – ss.5, 6 – High Court held that the
       parties belonged to Sawara tribe, a notified scheduled tribe
       and thus, the HSA, 1956 does not apply to them – Granted a
       portion as property to M’s daughters and their descendants
       (respondents) on the grounds of justice, equity and good
       conscience – Correctness:
       Held: HSA, 1956 clearly states that scheduled castes and tribes
       shall be outside its purview of application – Thus, HSA, 1956 does
       not apply to scheduled tribes – Therefore, the Courts below erred
       on this count, and the High Court took the correct view – Parties
       did not produce any notification demonstrating that the Sawara tribe
       stands de-notified – Further, ‘M’ passed away in 1951, that is, prior
       to the enactment of HSA, 1956 – No error in the judgment of the
       High Court applying the provisions of the Central Provinces Laws
       Act, 1875 and more particularly s.6 thereof which postulates the
       application of the principle of justice, equity and good conscience,
       to account for possibilities not covered by s.5 of the Act – Appeal
       has no merit, dismissed. [Paras 4-7, 9]

       Tribals – Female Tribals – Right of survivorship to –
       Recommendation to Central Government, reiterated:
       Held: Recommendation/suggestion made to the Central
       Government in the case of in Kamla Neti v. LAO to look into
       pathways to secure the right of survivorship to female tribals,
       reiterated – Hindu Succession Act, 1956. [Para 11]
* Author
666                                                         [2024] 12 S.C.R.

                           Supreme Court Reports


                               Case Law Cited
       Kamla Neti v. LAO [2022] 18 SCR 441 : (2023) 3 SCC 528 – held
       not applicable.
       Madhu Kishwar & Ors. v. State of Bihar [1996] Supp. 1 SCR
       442 : (1996) 5 SCC 125; M.V. Elisabeth and Others v. Harwan
       Investments and Trading Pvt. Ltd. Hanoekar House, Swatontapeth,
       Vasco-De-Gama, Goa [1992] 1 SCR 1003 : (1993) Supp. 2 SCC
       433; M.R. Balaji v. State of Mysore [1963] Supp. 1 SCR 439 : 1962
       SCC OnLine SC 147; State of Maharashtra v. Milind [2000] Supp.
       5 SCR 65 : (2001) 1 SCC 4; State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh
       [2024] 8 SCR 1321 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1860; Ahmedabad
       Women Action Group (AWAG) v. Union of India [1997] 2 SCR
       389 : (1997) 3 SCC 573; Bhuri v. Maroti, (2015) SCC OnLine Bom
       3173; Bhagwati v. Cheduram, 2019 SCC OnLine Chh 209; Bini
       B. (Dr.) v. Jayan P.R., 2015 SCC OnLine Ker 39489; M. Siddiq
       (Ram Janmabhumi Temple-5 J.) v. Suresh Das [2019] 18 SCR 1 :
       (2020) 1 SCC 1; Saraswathi Ammal v. Jagadambal [1953] 1 SCR
       939 : (1953) 1 SCC 362 – referred to.

                                 List of Acts
       Hindu Succession Act, 1956; Central Provinces Laws Act, 1875.

                              List of Keywords
       Application of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956; Scheduled tribe;
       Sawara tribe, Notified scheduled tribe; Customs; Tribal community;
       Scheduled castes; Hindu law; Inheritance; Hindu Religion;
       Sufficiently hinduised; De-notified; Common ancestor; Succession
       of property; Principles of justice, equity and good conscience;
       Female tribals; Right of survivorship.

                             Case Arising From
       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 13516 of 2024
       From the Judgment and Order dated 06.02.2019 of the High Court
       of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in SA No. 270 of 2003

                          Appearances for Parties
       Satish Pandey, Mahesh Kumar Tiwari, Ms. Nishi Prabha Singh,
       Ms. Jay Jaimini Pandey, Ms. Ayushi Pandey, Ms. Lalita Gupta,
       Abhishek Kumar Singh, Ms. Vijay Lakshmi, Braj Kishore Mishra,
       Advs. for the Appellants.
[2024] 12 S.C.R.                                                         667

                         Tirith Kumar & Ors. v. Daduram & Ors.


       Rajeev Kumar Bansal, Parvinder, Manish Das, Mukul Biswas,
       Vidya Sagar, Arun Kumar Arunachal, Arjun D Singh, Ms. Ankita
       Sharma, Advs. for the Respondents.

                       Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court

                                                Judgment

       Sanjay Karol, J.

       THE CHALLENGE
1.     This appeal questions the correctness of the judgment and order
       passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur, in Second
       Appeal No. 270 of 2003, dated 6th February 2019 and it raises the
       question as to whether the Hindu Succession Act, 19561 could be
       applied to the parties to the instant lis? The Courts below i.e. the
       First Appellate Court2 in Civil Appeal No.09A/2001 vide judgment
       dated 27th January, 2003 and the Trial Court3 in Civil Suit No. 131A of
       1995, by judgment dated 16th December, 2000 found the appellants
       to be ‘sufficiently hinduised’, having given up their customs as part
       of a tribal community and therefore are governed by Hindu law, and
       thereby the respondents herein do not have any rights over the
       property originally belonging to Mardan.

       BRIEF FACTS
2.     Brief facts as emanating from the record are:-
       2.1 This dispute, at the heart of it, pertains to ownership of land
           between two sides of the same family, with a common ancestor
           by the name of Chuchrung. This common ancestor had two sons
           named Mardan and Puni Ram. The sons and legal heirs of Puni
           Ram set the law in motion, seeking a declaration that the suit
           property situated at village Bagri Pali, measuring 13.95 acres
           bearing Khasra No. 26, belongs to them and for a permanent
           injunction against the respondents.



1    Hereinafter referred to as ‘HSA, 1956’.
2    The Court of Additional District Judge, Sakti, District Bilaspur.
3    The Court of Civil Judge Class-2, Sakti, District Bilaspur.
668                                                       [2024] 12 S.C.R.

                          Supreme Court Reports


       2.2 The following is the family tree:




       2.3 The dispute came before the Court of Civil Judge Class-2, Sakti,
           District Bilaspur, wherein six issues were framed. A perusal of
           the judgment shows that questions 2 to 6 were questions of
           fact. It was held as follows:
            2.3.1 Relying on the testimony and cross-examination of PW1,
                  Anandram is now represented by the present appellants
                  and also the statement of DW1, Daduram, it was held
                  that both the plaintiffs and defendants “abide and follow
                  the Hindu principles of law”.
            2.3.2 The dispute regarding the death of Mardan was resolved
                  with the Court observing that he had indeed died prior
                  to the coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act,
                  1956. To return such a finding, reliance was placed on
                  the evidence of PW1, Ugrasen PW2 and Karamaha
                  PW3. It was further stated that DW1 himself, in his cross-
                  examination, accepted such a fact.
            2.3.3 Qua the possession of the suit property, it was held that
                  post the death of Mardan in 1951, Puni Ram, father of
                  the plaintiff, took possession. Any right possessed by
                  Mardan would not have transferred over to his daughters
                  as prior to the HSA 1956, a daughter does not receive
                  any property upon the death of her father.
            2.3.4 In conclusion, it was held that the defendants did not
                  have any right of ownership over the property, which
                  originally belonged to Mardan and that the successors
                  of Puni Ram had the right over the said property. It was
[2024] 12 S.C.R.                                                           669

                       Tirith Kumar & Ors. v. Daduram & Ors.


                       ordered that the defendants would not interfere in the
                       ownership of the plaintiffs.
     2.4 The defendants, aggrieved by the findings summarised above,
         appealed the judgment. The First Appellate Court agreed with the
         findings arrived by the Court below in as much as that both parties
         did indeed follow the Hindu Religion and that the death of Mardan
         was prior to coming into force of the HSA, 1956, and as a result,
         the daughters of Mardan had no right over the subject property.
     2.5 Further aggrieved, the matter was carried to the High Court in
         the Second Appeal. The substantial questions of law framed
         are as under:
            1.     Whether the parties follow the principle of Hindu Law
                   and have been following as on today?
            2.     Whether Mardan and Puni Ram in succession the
                   property which they had received and from the
                   said property the income which accrued from the
                   same both Mardan and Puni Ram purchased other
                   property?
            3.     Whether the death of Mardan was done in the year
                   1951 since then the property of Muni Ram in succession
                   has received and at present the Plaintiffs are in use,
                   occupation and possession of the said property?
            4.     Whether the defendants, in accordance with law, got
                   their name entered and are in use, occupation and
                   possession?
            5.     Assistance and expenses
            6.     Whether Mardan died before coming into force the
                   Hindu Succession Act, 1956, in case yes and then
                   the results?
     2.6 The reasoning of the High Court in overturning the findings
         returned by the Courts below is that:
            2.6.1 The Court noticed Section 2 (2) of the HSA, 1956 and
                  the judgment of this Court in Madhu Kishwar & Ors. v.
                  State of Bihar,4 and held that HSA, 1956 does not apply


4   (1996) 5 SCC 125
670                                                            [2024] 12 S.C.R.

                              Supreme Court Reports


                      to the parties as they are Sawara, a notified scheduled
                      tribe within the meaning of Article 366(25), and there is
                      no notification on record which de-notifies them or directs
                      the application of HSA, 1956 to them.
             2.6.2 In regard to the question of whether the parties have
                   become sufficiently hinduised reference was made to Smt
                   Butaki Bai & Ors. v. Sukhbati & Ors. In the present
                   facts, it was held:
                      “The plaintiffs neither in the plaint nor in their
                      evidence particularised the prevalent tribal customs
                      except pleadings some ceremonies of marriage
                      in their caste. It has neither been pleaded nor
                      proved that they have abandoned their law of
                      origin (customary law) and they have given up their
                      customary succession and did not state anything so
                      as to be governed by in their matter of succession
                      and inheritance by any school of hindu law…”
             2.6.3 In the aforesaid backdrop, the Court invoked the Central
                   Provinces Laws Act, 1875 and in particular Sections 5
                   and 6 thereof. Referring to the judgment of this Court
                   in M.V. Elisabeth and Others v. Harwan Investments
                   and Trading Pvt. Ltd. Hanoekar House, Swatontapeth,
                   Vasco-De-Gama, Goa,5 as also certain other authorities,
                   the Court invoked the principles of justice, equity and
                   good conscience to hold that the legal representatives
                   of Mardan, i.e. his daughters and their successors-in-
                   interest, would be entitled to half share in the total suit
                   property. The appeal was partly allowed in these terms.
       2.7 It is with this background that the present appeal has come up
           for consideration before this Court.

       OUR CONSIDERATION
3.     The parties to the present lis claim to be Hindus and therefore ask that
       they be governed by Hindu law in matters of inheritance. The High
       Court has disallowed this contention on the ground that the parties



5    (1993) Supp. 2 SCC 433
[2024] 12 S.C.R.                                                           671

                     Tirith Kumar & Ors. v. Daduram & Ors.


     are members of the Sawara tribe, which is a notified tribe under
     Article 342 of the Constitution of India. The constitutional position in
     regard to Articles 341 and 342, which deal with scheduled castes and
     tribes, respectively, has been delineated by a Constitution Bench of
     this Court in M.R. Balaji v. State of Mysore 6 in the following terms:
            “20. …It was realised that in the Indian Society there
            were other classes of citizens who were equally, or may
            be somewhat less, backward than the Scheduled Castes
            and Tribes and it was thought that some special provision
            ought to be made even for them. Article 34(1) provides for
            the issue of public notification specifying the castes, races
            or tribes which shall, for the purposes of this Constitution,
            be deemed to be Scheduled Castes either in the State or
            the Union territory as the case may be. Similarly Article
            342 makes a provision for the issue of public notification
            in respect of Scheduled Tribes. Under Article 338(3),
            it is provided that references to the Scheduled Castes
            and Scheduled Tribes shall be construed as including
            references to such other Backward Classes as the
            President may, on receipt of the report of a commission
            appointed under Article 340(1) by order, specify and also
            to the Anglo-Indian community. It would thus be seen that
            this provision contemplates that some Backward Classes
            may by the Presidential order be included in Scheduled
            Castes and Tribes.”
     We may also notice the observations in State of Maharashtra v.
     Milind 7 in this context:
            “11. By virtue of powers vested under Articles 341 and 342
            of the Constitution of India, the President is empowered
            to issue public notification for the first time specifying
            the castes, races or tribes or part of or groups within
            castes, races, or tribes which shall, for the purposes
            of the Constitution be deemed to be Scheduled Castes
            or Scheduled Tribes in relation to a State or Union
            Territory, as the case may be. The language and terms of


6   1962 SCC OnLine SC 147
7   (2001) 1 SCC 4
672                                                         [2024] 12 S.C.R.

                               Supreme Court Reports


             Articles 341 and 342 are identical. What is said in relation
             to Article 341 mutatis mutandis applies to Article 342.
             The laudable object of the said articles is to provide
             additional protection to the members of the Scheduled
             Castes and Scheduled Tribes having regard to social and
             educational backwardness from which they have been
             suffering since a considerable length of time. The words
             “castes” or “tribes” in the expression “Scheduled Castes”
             and “Scheduled Tribes” are not used in the ordinary sense
             of the terms but are used in the sense of the definitions
             contained in Articles 366(24) and 366(25). In this view,
             a caste is a Scheduled Caste or a tribe is a Scheduled
             Tribe only if they are included in the President’s Orders
             issued under Articles 341 and 342 for the purpose of the
             Constitution. Exercising the powers vested in him, the
             President has issued the Constitution (Scheduled Castes)
             Order, 1950 and the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes)
             Order, 1950. Subsequently, some orders were issued
             under the said articles in relation to Union Territories and
             other States and there have been certain amendments
             in relation to Orders issued, by amendment Acts passed
             by Parliament.”
                                                   (Emphasis supplied)

       Recently, a seven-judge Bench in State of Punjab v. Davinder
       Singh 8 also made a reference to these judgments.
4.     As is clear from the aforesaid extracts, the lists made under
       Articles 341 and 342 are to be amended only with the permission of
       the President. So, naturally, for a tribe to be notified as a scheduled
       tribe, a notification to that effect has to be issued and vice versa,
       i.e. for a tribe to be de-notified as well. The High Court noted that
       the parties did not produce any notification demonstrating that the
       Sawara tribe stands de-notified. There is no possibility of a different
       view on this question.
5.     The HSA, 1956, at the very outset, details as to whom the legislation
       would apply, and it clearly states that scheduled castes and tribes


8    2024 SCC OnLine SC 1860
[2024] 12 S.C.R.                                                            673

                        Tirith Kumar & Ors. v. Daduram & Ors.


      shall be outside its purview of application. Section 2(2) thereof reads
      as under:
             “2. Application of Act.― (1)This Act applies―
             …
             (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section
             (1), nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the
             members of any Scheduled Tribe within the meaning of
             clause (25) of article 366 of the Constitution unless the
             Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette,
             otherwise directs.”
6.    The words of the section are explicit. The HSA, 1956, cannot apply
      to scheduled tribes. This position of law is well settled. We may
      reproduce with profit the observations made in certain judgments
      of this Court.
      6.1 In Madhu Kishwar v. State of Bihar,9 MM Punchhi, J as his
          Lordship then was, noted the application of Section 2(2) of
          HSA as follows:
             “4. …Sub-section (2) of Section 2 of the Hindu Succession
             Act significantly provides that nothing contained in the Act
             shall apply to the members of any Scheduled Tribe within
             the meaning of clause (25) of Article 366 of the Constitution
             unless otherwise directed by the Central Government by
             means of a notification in the Official Gazette. Section
             3(2) further provides that in the Act, unless the context
             otherwise requires, words importing the masculine gender
             shall not be taken to include females. (emphasis supplied)
             General rule of legislative practice is that unless there
             is anything repugnant in the subject or context, words
             importing the masculine gender used in statutes are to be
             taken to include females. Attention be drawn to Section 13
             of the General Clauses Act. But in matters of succession
             the general rule of plurality would have to be applied with
             circumspection. The afore provision thus appears to have
             been inserted ex abundanti cautela. Even under Section



9    (1996) 5 SCC 125
674                                                         [2024] 12 S.C.R.

                                 Supreme Court Reports


             3 of the Indian Succession Act the State Government is
             empowered to exempt any race, sect or tribe from the
             operation of the Act and the tribes of Mundas, Oraons,
             Santhals etc. in the State of Bihar, who are included in
             our concern, have been so exempted. Thus, neither the
             Hindu Succession Act, nor the Indian Succession Act, nor
             even the Shariat law is applicable to the custom-governed
             tribals. And custom, as is well recognized, varies from
             people to people and region to region.”
             The aforesaid position was reiterated by a Bench of three
             learned judges in Ahmedabad Women Action Group
             (AWAG) v. Union of India.10
       6.2 We find that the aforesaid position has been consistently
           adopted by the High Courts as well. Reference may be made to
           Bhuri v. Maroti,11 Bhagwati v. Cheduram,12 and Bini B. (Dr.)
           v. Jayan P.R.13. Here only we may clarify that this reference
           to judgments of the High Courts shall not be construed as a
           comment upon their merits.
7.     Therefore, the Courts below clearly erred on this count, and the High
       Court took the correct view. Having observed this, the High Court
       then proceeded to grant a portion as property to Mardan’s daughters
       and their descendants on the grounds of justice, equity and good
       conscience, apparently but without explicit mention, taking cue from
       the dissenting judgment Madhu Kishwar (supra) by Ramaswamy, J.,
       wherein he held as under:
             “38. Law is the manifestation of principles of justice,
             equity and good conscience. Rule of law should establish
             a uniform pattern for harmonious existence in a society
             where every individual would exercise his rights to his best
             advantage to achieve excellence, subject to protective
             discrimination. The best advantage of one person could
             be the worst disadvantage to another. Law steps in to
             iron out such creases and ensures equality of protection


10   (1997) 3 SCC 573
11   2015 SCC OnLine Bom 3173
12   2019 SCC OnLine Chh 209
13   2015 SCC OnLine Ker 39489
[2024] 12 S.C.R.                                                             675

                      Tirith Kumar & Ors. v. Daduram & Ors.


             to individuals as well as group liberties. Man›s status is a
             creature of substantive as well as procedural law to which
             legal incidents would attach. Justice, equality and fraternity
             are trinity for social and economic equality…

                        x                  x                    x

             56. I would hold that the provisions of the Hindu Succession
             Act, 1956 and the Indian Succession Act, 1925 though
             in terms, would not apply to the Scheduled Tribes, the
             general principles contained therein being consistent with
             justice, equity, fairness, justness and good conscience
             would apply to them. Accordingly I hold that the Scheduled
             Tribe women would succeed to the estate of their parent,
             brother, husband, as heirs by intestate succession and
             inherit the property with equal share with the male heir
             with absolute rights as per the general principles of the
             Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as amended and interpreted
             by this Court and equally of the Indian Succession Act to
             tribal Christians…”
8.    Let us examine a few pronouncements on the application of principle
      of justice, equity and good conscience.
      8.1 In M. Siddiq (Ram Janmabhumi Temple-5 J.) v. Suresh
          Das,14 five learned judges extensively dealt with the concept
          of justice, equity and good conscience. A few of the relevant
          paragraphs are as under:
             “1003. …The modification of general rules to the
             circumstances of the case is guided by equity, not in
             derogation or negation of positive law, but in addition to it.
             It supplements positive law but does not supplant it. In a
             second sense, however, where positive law is silent as to
             the applicable legal principles, equity assumes a primary
             role as the source of law itself. Equity steps in to fill the
             gaps that exist in positive law. Thus, where no positive
             law is discernible, courts turn to equity as a source of
             the applicable law. In addition to these, Derrett notes that


14   (2020) 1 SCC 1
676                                                      [2024] 12 S.C.R.

                      Supreme Court Reports


       there is a third sense in which equity or aequitas assumed
       importance — where established political authority is taken
       away or is in doubt and the formal sources of law are in
       doubt, the nature of judicial office requires a decision in
       accordance with ex bono et aequo.

                x                    x                    x

       1019. …There is (at least in theory) a reduced scope for
       the application of justice, equity and good conscience when
       doctrinal positions established under a statute cover factual
       situations or where the principles underlying the system of
       personal law in question can be definitively ascertained.
       But even then, it would do a disservice to judicial craft to
       adopt a theory which excludes the application of justice,
       equity and good conscience to areas of law governed by
       statute. For the law develops interstitially, as Judges work
       themselves in tandem with statute law to arrive at just
       outcomes. Where the rights of the parties are not governed
       by a particular personal law, or where the personal law is
       silent or incapable of being ascertained by a court, where
       a code has a lacuna, or where the source of law fails or
       requires to be supplemented, justice, equity and good
       conscience may properly be referred to.

                x                    x                    x

       1022. The common underlying thread is that justice,
       good conscience and equity plays a supplementary
       role in enabling courts to mould the relief to suit the
       circumstances that present themselves before courts with
       the principal purpose of ensuring a just outcome. Where
       the existing statutory framework is inadequate for courts
       to adjudicate upon the dispute before them, or no settled
       judicial doctrine or custom can be availed of, courts may
       legitimately take recourse to the principles of justice, equity
       and good conscience to effectively and fairly dispose of the
       case. A court cannot abdicate its responsibility to decide
       a dispute over legal rights merely because the facts of a
       case do not readily submit themselves to the application
[2024] 12 S.C.R.                                                             677

                        Tirith Kumar & Ors. v. Daduram & Ors.


             of the letter of the existing law. Courts in India have long
             availed of the principles of justice, good conscience and
             equity to supplement the incompleteness or inapplicability
             of the letter of the law with the ground realities of legal
             disputes to do justice between the parties. Equity, as an
             essential component of justice, formed the final step in
             the just adjudication of disputes.”
                                                          (Emphasis supplied)

      8.2 In a case concerning the devolution of property either by custom
          or by law, when it comes to a ‘dasi’, arising out of the State of
          Madras, M.C. Mahajan, J., as his Lordship then was observed
          in Saraswathi Ammal v. Jagadambal 15 as follows:
             “21. … In the absence of proof of existence of a custom
             governing succession the decision of the case has to rest
             on the rules of justice, equity and good conscience because
             admittedly no clear text of Hindu law applies to such a
             case. The High Court thought that the just rule to apply
             was one of propinquity to the case, according to which
             the married and dasi daughters would take the mother›s
             property in equal shares. No exception can be taken to
             this finding given by the High Court. No other rule was
             suggested to us leading to a contrary result.”
      8.3 In M.V. Elisabeth (supra), the Court held as under:
             “86. The judicial power of this country, which is an aspect
             of national sovereignty, is vested in the people and is
             articulated in the provisions of the Constitution and the laws
             and is exercised by courts empowered to exercise it. It is
             absurd to confine that power to the provisions of imperial
             statutes of a bygone age. Access to Court which is an
             important right vested in every citizen implies the existence
             of the power of the Court to render justice according to
             law. Where statute is silent and judicial intervention is
             required, Courts strive to redress grievances according
             to what is perceived to be principles of justice, equity and
             good conscience.”


15   (1953) 1 SCC 362
678                                                           [2024] 12 S.C.R.

                            Supreme Court Reports


9.     Having considered the pronouncements of this Court as aforesaid,
       and keeping in view the fact that Mardan passed away in the year
       1951, that is, prior to the enactment of HSA, 1956, we find no error
       in the judgment of the High Court applying the provisions of the
       Central Provinces Laws Act, 1875 and more particularly Section 6
       thereof which postulates the application of the principle of justice,
       equity and good conscience, to account for possibilities not covered
       by Section 5 of the Act.
10. We find that a coordinate Bench of this Court in Kamla Neti v.
    LAO,16 held in para 11 thereof that equity cannot supplant the law,
    and when the law is clear, the same has to be applied. That case
    pertains to the division of compensation awarded for land acquired,
    however, the present dispute pertains directly to succession of
    property, and therefore in our considered view, this case stands on
    a different footing.
11. Kamla Neti (supra) is, therefore, distinguishable on facts and not
    applicable to the present case. However, the recommendation/
    suggestion made therein to the Central Government to look into
    pathways to secure the right of survivorship to female tribals is
    hereby reiterated. For emphasis, the observations in this regard are
    also extracted herein below:
             “17. Before parting, we may observe that there may not be
             any justification to deny the right of survivorship so far as
             the female member of the tribal community is concerned.
             When the daughter belonging to the non-tribal community
             is entitled to the equal share in the property of the father,
             there is no reason to deny such right to the daughter of
             the Tribal community. Female tribal is entitled to parity with
             male tribal in intestate succession. To deny the equal right
             to the daughter belonging to the tribal even after a period
             of 70 years of the Constitution of India under which right
             to equality is guaranteed, it is high time for the Central
             Government to look into the matter and if required, to
             amend the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act by
             which the Hindu Succession Act is not made applicable
             to the members of the Scheduled Tribe.


16   (2023) 3 SCC 528
[2024] 12 S.C.R.                                                          679

                    Tirith Kumar & Ors. v. Daduram & Ors.


             18. Therefore, though we dismiss the present appeal,
             it is directed to examine the question by the Central
             Government to consider it just and necessary to withdraw
             the exemptions provided under the Hindu Succession Act
             insofar as the applicability of the provisions of the Hindu
             Succession Act to the Scheduled Tribes is concerned and
             whether to bring a suitable amendment or not. We hope and
             trust that the Central Government will look into the matter
             and take an appropriate decision taking into consideration
             the right to equality guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21
             of the Constitution of India.”
12. With the aforesaid observations, the appeal is dismissed as bereft
    of merit. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

     Result of the case: Appeal dismissed.



     †
         Headnotes prepared by: Divya Pandey