The Supreme Court allowed an appeal and decreed the plaintiff’s suit for ownership of ancestral lands, holding that under Oraon customary law, the nearest male agnate succeeds in the absence of direct male heirs, overriding claims through a daughter and her husband (ghardamad).
Background
Sukhu Oraon (grandfather) had three sons: Dhungru, Ledura, and Bhoula. Plaintiff Sukhu (Dhungru’s son) claimed ownership of all family lands. Defendants (Bhoula’s daughter Budhain and her husband Punai) asserted that Ledura had taken Punai as ghardamad (adopted son-in-law) and that properties were partitioned in their favour.
Key issues: Validity of ghardamad adoption by uncle-in-law, inheritance rights of daughters under Oraon custom, and effect of a 1975 partition deed. All lower courts dismissed the suit. High Court upheld concurrent findings.
Supreme Court’s Ruling
Justice Sanjay Karol (for the Bench with Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh) analysed evidence and custom:
- Proof of Custom: Custom must be ancient, certain, reasonable, and continuously observed. Burden lies on the party asserting it. General evidence from community members suffices; judicial notice possible once established.
- Oraon Custom: Daughters have no inheritance rights. Ghardamad (son-in-law) may acquire rights in father-in-law’s property under specific conditions, but evidence here was inconsistent and unproven for uncle-in-law adopting niece’s husband.
- Evidence Evaluation: Plaintiff’s witnesses were consistent on no partition and no rights for daughters. Defence witnesses contradicted each other on key issues (partition, daughter’s rights, succession). SC Roy’s scholarly work on Oraons supported nearest male agnate succeeding in absence of direct male heirs.
- Concurrent Findings: While generally not interfered with, SC can examine where findings are perverse, ignore material evidence, or misapply custom (citing Srinivas Ram Kumar, Bharwada Bhoginbhai, etc.).
- Lease/Partition Deed: Irrelevant to title as it could not confer rights absent underlying shares under custom.
Result: Judgments of lower courts set aside. Plaintiff’s suit decreed. All consequences to follow.
Key Takeaways
- Tribal customs on inheritance require strict proof through consistent usage and community evidence.
- Daughters generally excluded from inheritance in Oraon custom; ghardamad rights are limited and fact-specific.
- Concurrent findings under Article 136 can be overturned if perverse or based on misappreciation of custom/evidence.
- Scholarly works and consistent witness testimony carry significant weight in customary law disputes.
Case Details
Case Name: Bejla Oraon v. Kali Das Oraon & Ors.
Citation: 2026 INSC 672 (Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 23458 of 2024)
Court: Supreme Court of India
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh
Date of Judgment: 09 July 2026
Click HERE for full Judgment
Lawcutor 