Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether Section 55 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 bars joint bhumidhars from partitioning their holdings by family settlement or compromise.
Analysis: Section 55 permits a bhumidhar to sue for partition but does not expressly or impliedly exclude partition by mutual settlement. The use of the word "may" indicates a permissive remedy and not an exhaustive or mandatory mode of partition. The statutory scheme was read harmoniously with the recognised legal policy favouring family arrangements and amicable settlement of disputes. The provisions relied upon to prevent fragmentation did not negate the validity of a bona fide inter se family partition, though any statutory violation arising from such partition could still be dealt with under the Act.
Conclusion: Section 55 does not prohibit partition of joint bhumidhari land through a family settlement or compromise; the challenge by the appellants fails.
Final Conclusion: The intra-court appeal was dismissed, and the family settlement based partition and resulting mutation were upheld in principle.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute confers a right to sue for partition using permissive language, it does not, without express prohibition, exclude partition by a bona fide family settlement or mutual compromise.