Clarifying Inheritance Laws Under Marumakkathayam Customary Law

Facts of the Case

1. Parties Involved: The dispute pertains to the Andippillil Tharwad property in Kerala. The plaintiffs, descendants of Parukutty Amma, sought partition and possession of properties under the Marumakkathayam system of inheritance.
2. Nature of Dispute: The properties were classified into two items:
   • Item No. 1: Allegedly tharwad property devolved through a partition deed in 1950.
   • Item No. 2: Allegedly thavazhi property inherited by Parukutty Amma and her children through a mortgage deed executed by Padmanabhan’s mother.
3. Legal Proceedings: The Trial Court found both properties to be thavazhi or tharwad properties, a decision upheld by the High Court.

Contentions of the Parties

Appellants (Original Defendants):

1. Argued that Item No. 1 property was co-owned, not tharwad property, and the 1950 partition deed was improperly classified.
2. Claimed that Item No. 2 was putravakasam property belonging to Padmanabhan, his wife, and children, not thavazhi property.
3. Urged reliance on the minority opinion in Mary Cheriyan v. Bhargavi Pillai [(1967) SCC OnLine Ker 68], arguing the property acquired by single females should not automatically retain tharwad characteristics.

Respondents (Original Plaintiffs):

1. Asserted that both properties were thavazhi properties of the descendants of Parukutty Amma.
2. Supported the majority view in Mary Cheriyan, stating that properties acquired in a partition retain their tharwad nature and devolve accordingly.

Principle of the Case

This case focuses on the principles of inheritance under the Marumakkathayam law, specifically:

1. Whether properties acquired by females in partition retain tharwad characteristics.
2. Whether a property classified as thavazhi property remains indivisible among its members until proper legal action is taken.

The judgment revisits the contentious majority and minority views in Mary Cheriyan, ultimately favoring the minority opinion for future applications, asserting that partition alters the nature of property from joint to individual ownership.

Final Order

1. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the Trial Court and High Court’s decisions:
   • Both items of property were thavazhi properties.
   • The preliminary decree for partition was upheld.
2. Prospective Application: The minority view in Mary Cheriyan was accepted as the correct interpretation of law but is to be applied only prospectively.
3. No Costs: No cost orders were imposed on the parties.

Impact on Public Law and Order

This judgment enhances clarity in the application of Marumakkathayam law, addressing inheritance complexities and affirming gender-equitable principles. It establishes precedent for the legal transformation of property characteristics upon partition, reducing ambiguity and fostering legal consistency.

Citation: Ramachandran & Ors. v. Vijayan & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 2161/2012, Supreme Court of India, Judgment dated November 22, 2024.