It is in the aforesaid background that daughters are entitled to 1/3rd share in all the properties as scheduled in the plaint. The same would be in accordance with the dictum as laid in Vineeta Sharma (supra), while passing the final decree. At the cost of repetition, we state that by virtue of the preliminary decree passed by the Trial Court, which was confirmed by the Division Bench of the High Court, the issues decided therein will be deemed to have become final but as the partition suit is required to be decided in stages, the same can be regarded as fully and completely decided only when the final decree is passed.

In a suit is for partition or separation of a share, the court at the first stage decides whether the plaintiff has a share in the suit property and whether he is entitled to division and separate possession. The decision on these two issues is exercise of a judicial function and results in first stage decision termed as `decree’ under Order 20 Rule 18(1) and termed as `preliminary decree’ under Order 20 Rule 18(2) of the Code.

The Supreme Court in Choote Khan V. Mal Khan [1954 AIR 575, 1955 SCR 60] while considering the nature of the entries in Jamabandi and as to whether such entries fall within the purview of Record of Rights maintained under Section 31 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 observed that “by section 44 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act an entry made in the record of rights or in an annual record shall be presumed to be true until the contrary is proved. That entries in the Jamabandies fall within the purview of the record of rights under section 31 of the Act admits of no doubt.

The solution to this dilemma, which I put forward, is that his Majesty’s Government should transfer power now to one or two governments of British India each having Dominion status as soon as the necessary arrangements can be made. This I hope will be within the next few months. I am glad to announce that his Majesty’s Government have accepted this proposal and are already having legislation prepared for introduction in Parliament this session. As a result of these decisions the special function of the India Office will no longer have to be carried out, and some other machinery will be set up to conduct future relations between his Majesty’s Government and India.

The Partition Act was enacted in 1893 for the purpose of providing that where division of property cannot reasonably or conveniently be made and that sale of the property and distribution of proceeds would be more beneficial for all the share-holders, then the court may direct the sale of the property and distribution of the proceeds. The Act is technical in character. It has been in force for about 87 years and it is time that the defects and deficiencies in its working should be removed.

The stand taken by Hindu Mahasabha has been defined by Mr. V. D. Savarkar, the President of the Sabha, in his presidential addresses at the annual sessions of the Sabha. As defined by him, the Hindu Maha Sabha is against Pakistan and proposes to resist it by all means. What these means are we do not know. If they are force, coercion and resistance, they are only negative alternatives and Mr. Savarkar and the Hindu Maha Sabha alone can say how far these means will succeed.

On January 26, 1979, India’s Republic Day, then Left Front chief minister Jyoti Basu announced an economic blockade of Marichjhapi. Thirty police launches surrounded the island; the refugees were tear-gassed, their huts, fisheries, and tube-wells destroyed. Those who tried to cross the river in makeshift boats were shot at. The refugees, armed with carpentry tools and makeshift bows and arrows were no match for the government forces.

Recent Updates