In a significant judgment reinforcing the unique inheritance rights of Scheduled Tribes, the Supreme Court of India ruled in favor of the descendants of Mardan, a member of the Sawara tribe, granting them a share in ancestral property. The verdict, delivered by a bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice C.T. Ravikumar, emphasized the principles of justice, equity, and good conscience while recognizing tribal customs and constitutional safeguards.
The case, Tirith Kumar & Ors. v. Daduram & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 13516 of 2024), arose from a family property dispute over 13.95 acres of land in Bagri Pali village, Chhattisgarh. The appellants sought to overturn a High Court ruling that granted property rights to Mardan’s daughters, challenging it on the grounds that the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (HSA), was applicable to the parties.
Background of the Case
The dispute originated from the descendants of Chuchrung, a common ancestor, and involved conflicting claims of inheritance. Mardan and Puni Ram, Chuchrung’s sons, had inherited the property. Following Mardan’s death in 1951, prior to the enactment of the HSA, the appellants argued that inheritance laws under Hindu principles excluded Mardan’s daughters. Lower courts agreed, ruling that the family had sufficiently “Hinduised” their customs, making the HSA applicable.
However, the Chhattisgarh High Court reversed these findings, holding that as members of the Sawara tribe—a Scheduled Tribe under Article 342 of the Constitution—the appellants were governed by tribal customs rather than the HSA. It granted property rights to Mardan’s daughters based on principles of justice and equity, a decision that was upheld by the Supreme Court.
Legal Issues Addressed
The judgment delved into critical legal questions:
1. Applicability of the Hindu Succession Act: Section 2(2) of the HSA excludes its application to Scheduled Tribes unless specifically notified by the Central Government. The Court reaffirmed this provision, rejecting claims of “Hinduisation” without substantial proof.
2. Recognition of Tribal Customary Law: The bench emphasized that tribal inheritance laws, rooted in customs, remain paramount unless explicitly superseded by statutory law.
3. Role of Justice, Equity, and Good Conscience: The Court invoked the Central Provinces Laws Act, 1875, allowing equitable principles to bridge gaps in legal provisions. It cited precedents where courts applied equity to ensure justice in cases of incomplete statutory frameworks.
Key Observations by the Court
The Court stressed that tribal communities’ unique customs must be preserved unless explicitly altered by law. Highlighting the principles of equality, it noted:
“Justice, equity, and good conscience must guide decisions in cases where existing laws fail to address nuanced realities. The rights of tribal women to inherit property must align with constitutional values of equality and dignity.”
The judgment also reiterated previous suggestions to the Central Government, urging the extension of equal inheritance rights to tribal women under the HSA to eliminate discriminatory practices.
Decision
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision, granting Mardan’s daughters a rightful share in the property. It dismissed the appeal as “bereft of merit” and underscored the constitutional mandate to protect Scheduled Tribes’ rights.
