Ismail Hansda And Ors vs Mathias Murmu And Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 4310 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Ismail Hansda And Ors vs Mathias Murmu And Ors on 26 June, 2025

Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                                  S.A. No. 309 of 2016

                     Ismail Hansda and Ors.                  ...     ...      Appellants
                                          Versus
                     Mathias Murmu and Ors.           ...        ...        Respondents
                                          ---

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Appellants : Mr. Rahul Kumar Gupta, Advocate : Mr. Niraj Kishore, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sharma, Advocate

---

25/26.06.2025 The learned counsel for the appellants has relied upon paragraphs 12 and 14 of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2013) 4 SCC 97 (Laxmibai (deal) through Lrs. And Anr. Vs. Bhagwantbuva (Dead) through Lrs. And Ors.) and submitted that under normal circumstances, the custom in order to be made enforceable through the process of law, is required to be proved to be ancient, uniform, certain, continuous and compulsory. He submits that unless each of the element is proved by the person who is relying upon the custom, the alleged custom cannot be given effect to through the process of law.

2. The learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that in the plaint, the plaintiffs had pleaded custom of disentitling daughters from inheriting properties under the customary law and it was their specific case that a daughter would inherit only through ghar jamai form of marriage. However, in the written statement, the defendants had asserted that there was ghar jamai form of marriage and further they had also asserted that the daughter would otherwise also be entitled for inheritance under the general law. The learned counsel has relied upon the Gantzer settlement report which has been relied upon by both the courts and has submitted that the Gantzer settlement report itself indicated that although there was an ancient custom excluding daughters from inheriting the property but at the same time it was found that such a custom was neither uniform nor certain nor continuous nor compulsory.

3. The learned counsel for the appellants has also submitted that in various judgements Gantzer report has been considered but the Gantzer report is to be read as a whole.

4. The learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that he would place the following judgements on the next date of hearing:

                (i)    2007 SCC Online Jhar 272
                (ii)   (1996) 5 SCC 125

5. Both the counsels have relied upon the judgment passed in S.A. No.127 of 2014.

6. Post this case for further hearing on 30.06.2025 to be taken up at 12 p.m.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Saurav/