Supreme Court says Class I heirs get FIR

The Supreme Court has ruled that Category I legal heirs have a preferential right to purchase inherited agricultural land if another heir decides to sell his share, holding that Section 22 of the Hindu Succession Act (HSA) extends to agricultural land inherited under the Act.

The decision means that when a Class I heir proposes to transfer an inherited share in agricultural land, other Class I heirs must first be given the opportunity to purchase that interest before it can be sold to an outsider.

Class I heirs include the deceased’s spouse, children and mother, who are first in line to inherit the property in the absence of a will.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N Kotiswar Singh dismissed the appeal challenging the applicability of Section 22 to agricultural land. The court upheld the claim of a co-heiress who sought to enforce a statutory right held by several siblings after they sold their inherited shares in agricultural land to a third party.

Section 22 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, gives Category I legal heirs a preferential right to purchase inherited immovable property or business if any co-heirs decide to sell their share.

The bench said that once agricultural land is transferred by inheritance under the Hindu Succession Act, it is not excluded from the operation of Section 22 merely because it is agricultural property. The purpose of the provision, the court said, is to preserve the integrity of the inherited property by giving the co-heirs the first opportunity to acquire the share proposed to be transferred.

Rejecting the constitutional challenge to Section 22, the court clarified that its earlier Constitution Bench judgment striking down parts of the Punjab Pre-Emption Act had no bearing on the validity of the Hindu Succession Act provision.

The judges held that the Punjab law was invalid because it created an unfair classification, whereas Section 22 applies equally to all Class I heirs and does not suffer from the same constitutional weakness.

This decision strengthens the statutory protections available to Class I heirs and is expected to guide future disputes involving the sale of inherited agricultural land to third parties.