Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 21

ESCHEAT

SUBMITTED BY
RUBESH.M
BA0130050

UNDER THE GUIDANCE & SUPERVISION OF


MS.SANITTA MARIA STEPHEN
(PROFESSOR OF FAMILY LAW)
1 | Page

INTRODUCTION

1.1 INTRODUCTION :
Escheat is a concept in land law. It means the reversion of land to the state on failure of heirs of
the owners on his outlawry.

The concept of escheat has been derived from the feudal rules that where an estate simply comes
to an end, the land is reversed to the state by whose ancestors or predecessors the estate was
originally created.

The aim of escheat is that no land should be left in limbo or ownerless.

Escheat statutes vary by state, but all prescribe a procedure for location of the rightful owner. In
some states title to certain types of property automatically passes to the state when it escheats for
lack of a proper claimant. In other states, a required period of time must elapse in prior to the
commencement of escheat proceedings. This does not bar a claimant from stating his or her
claim before completion of the escheat proceedings. Some laws require claimants to assert their
rights within a period of time or forfeit them. Often, states mandate that individuals
2 | Page

administering estates notify the state government of the existence of property that might be
subjected to escheat.

The primary burden of proving that there is no proper individual entitled to own the property in
question rests with the state, and the general rules regarding the admissibility of evidence are
applicable. Rules of presumption, such as the common-law presumption of death after a sevenyear disappearance, can be used to support the case of the state. After the state has proved a
legally sufficient case, any individual claiming a right to the property has an opportunity to go
forward and argue against the evidence submitted by the state.

Some states offer money to informers who notify the state of property that might be subjected to
escheat. Informers might be required to provide evidence and pursue the case to a conclusion
before they will be entitled to a fee. Other states provide compensation for an escheater, a person
appointed by the court to manage the claim of the state for escheat. An escheater is entitled to be
paid a reasonable amount even if he or she does not succeed in recovering the property for the
state.

This paper analysis is towards doctrine of escheat in India. Though there are laws in Hindu
law1,case laws Girichari Lal.V Government of Bengal2, Collector
of Machulipattanam, V Kavaly Venkatiah and in case of Muslim law doctrine of escheat is

1 .sec 29 of the Hindu succession Act 1956


2 (1916) ILR 38 ALL 416
3 | Page

accepted. There are various other state laws in Andhra Pradesh3, Orissa4 and many other states of
India.

This paper mainly focuses on the history and need of this doctrine in India. This paper also
analyses all the laws so far made by the government. The paper also analyses the necessity of
this doctrine in India.

1.2.SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY :
The purpose of this study is to find out the need of escheat in India. The implementation of laws
in Hindu law,Muslim law and other state regarding escheat will be analysed and further
suggestions will be given in order to correct the flaws in the laws.

The study will look into the major reason for government taking away the ownership of an
ownerless land by way of escheat. This study also tries to solve and suggest ways to solve the
flaws in laws. The power or right of the government to take away the land of the individual after
the death of the same, who doesn't have heirs. The study of recent cases filed in courts in relation
to this is deeply analysed for the further development in escheat law.

1.3 OBJECTIVE OF STUDY :


The objectives of the research are to:
a) To study the need of the doctrine of escheat and to analyse on the same
3 Andhra Pradesh escheats and Bona Vacantia Act 1974
4 the Orissa escheats Act 1979
4 | Page

b) To explore the various law implemented by the state and to analyse it.

1.4 HYPOTHESIS :
The hypothesis for research is the right of the government to take away the ownerless land.

1.5 SCOPE OF STUDY :


The study will focus on the history of escheats worldwide and the need for escheat in India. The
government role in escheat laws will be discussed in this study. The study will examine the laws
of Indian government on doctrine of escheat. The acts and laws implemented by the
Indian government will be analysed in this study.

The study will be limited to only Indian laws. Brief study of Indian law will be done. In order to
understand clearly similar legislation regarding this topic will be considered accordingly.

1.6 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:


The methodology adopted for research is purely doctrinal in nature. The present research is done
with the help of primary resources such as statute,regulation and notices issued by competent
authorities. The citation method I have adopted is MLA .Secondary sources such as
books,journals and periodicals,speeches and more were also referred.

1.7 TENTATIVE CHAPTERIZATION:


1. Introduction :
5 | Page

This chapter gives a basic outline of the research by giving a brief idea of what is being dealt in
the research. Along with the significance of
research objectives,hypothesis,research question,scope etc.
2. History :
This chapter will give the brief history of the the doctrine
3.

Analysis of laws by the government :

This chapter analyses the laws imposed by the government regarding escheat
3.1 Escheat in common English law
3.2 Escheat in Hindu law
3.3 Escheat in Muslim law
3.4 Escheat in Christian law
3.5 Escheat in other state laws
4.

Necessity of Escheat:
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Right of government to take property
4.3 Objective of the doctrine of escheat

5.

Conclusion and suggestion

1.8 REVIEW OF LITERATURE :


Books :
6 | Page

S.T. Gibson, "The Escheatries, 13271341", English Historical Review, 36(1921).


In this book, the author has given the history of the escheat in English law,a brief history
regarding the escheat. This actually explains the idea regarding the ownership of the state or the
crown in order to be left ownerless or limbo. The author gives a neat view on the escheat on how
it has changed the view to take the ownership by the government. This actually pictures the aim
of escheat and later how the aim has interchanged into taking away the ownerless property. This
also gives explanation regarding what will happen if there is no escheat, the advantages, as well
as the disadvantages regarding it.

INTRODUCTION

7 | Page

Escheat is a common law doctrine which transfers the property of a person who dies without
heirs to the crown or state. It serves to ensure that property is not left in "limbo" without
recognized ownership. It originally applied to a number of situations where a legal interest in
land was destroyed by operation of law, so that the ownership of the land reverted to the
immediately superior feudal lord.
The primary burden of proving that there is no proper individual entitled to own the property in
question rests with the state, and the general rules regarding the admissibility of evidence are
applicable. Rules of presumption, such as the common-law presumption of death after a sevenyear disappearance, can be used to support the case of the state. After the state has proved a
legally sufficient case, any individual claiming a right to the property has an opportunity to go
forward and argue against the evidence submitted by the state.

2.

HISTORY

The principle of escheat originated in England during the middle Ages. The basic premise was
that property which remained without an owner or upon failure to make claim by a descendants
heirs, reverted to the Sovereign from whom all property rights were derived. This concept was
brought to the American colonies by the English settlers.
Upon the conclusion of the Revolutionary War, the State of North Carolina succeeded to the
rights previously held by the Crown, including the right of escheat. The North Carolina
Legislature adopted the University Act of 1789 which gave the newly formed University all the
property that has heretofore or shall hereafter escheat to the state.
Children may be fond of the phrase "finders keepers, losers weepers but unclaimed property
professionals know this is rarely the case and state escheatment laws are never as simple as
calling "dibs on abandoned assets.
So, our confusing patchwork of unclaimed property laws originate and how has it evolved over
the years. Like many time-honored American traditions (whiskey and fried food come to mind
8 | Page

immediately), the concept of unclaimed property was first established in feudal England. The
term "escheat" derives from the Latinex-cadere meaning "to fall out. Under English common
law, any lands held "by tenure (i.e., occupied by someone other than the owner) were returned
to the feudal lord upon the death of an heirless tenant.
The idea behind escheatment laws was simple: when a landholder died, went to war or was
convicted of a crime and imprisoned, his property reverted to the landowner in order to ensure its
continued productivity and to prevent "squatters without inheritance rights from usurping land
that did not belong to them.
Following the Norman Conquest of England, the monarch became the sole "owner" of all the
land in the kingdom, a position that persists to the present day. The king then granted land to his
favored followers, who became tenants-in-chief, under various contracts of feudal land tenure.
Such tenures never conferred ownership of land but merely ownership of rights over it. This
distinction between ownership and stewardship of unclaimed property would be a hallmark of
later U.S. laws.
Seems logical enough, right? All land belongs to the state (or in this case the crown) and reverts
back to the crown once the holder is dead or otherwise loses his claim to the property.
Early common law forms of escheatment applied only to real estate the concept of bona
vacantia ("ownerless goods) emerged many years later as a statute provision governing personal
property without a clear heir.
On the ground of the above said Escheat also gets a place in our Indian constitution Doctrine
of Escheat also finds mention in Article 296 of the Constitution.
Article 296 Subject as hereinafter provided, any property in the territory of India which, if this
Constitution had not come into operation, would have accrued to His Majesty or, as the case may
be, to the Ruler of an Indian State by escheat or lapse, or as bona vacantia for want of a rightful
owner, shall, if it is property situate in a State, vest in such State, and shall, in any other case,
vest in the Union.

9 | Page

Doctrine of Escheat or bona vacantia in India


The Doctrine of bona vacantia or Escheat was declared to be a part of the law in India by the
Privy Council as early as in 1860 in Collector of Masulipatam v. Cavary Vancata Narrainappah5.
This case also held that the General Law of universal application and that General Law was
that private ownership not existing, the State must be the owner as the ultimate Lord.
The right to acquire by way of escheat or as bona vacantia is not a creature of any Private Law of
Succession but is an attribute of Sovereignty. It is true that Statutory provisions of Private Law
of Succession such as Section 29 of Hindu Succession Act sometimes expressly recognize right
of the State to acquire properties by escheat or as bona vacantia. But that right would have been
very much there even without any such provisions6.
The case of Pierce Leslie and Co. Ltd. v. Violet Ouchterlong Waoshare 7 categorically states that:
Property of an intestate dying without leaving lawful heirs and the property of a dissolved
Corporation passes to the Government by escheat or as bona vacantia". And relying on this
decision, the Supreme Court in Narendra Bahadur Tandon v. Shanker Lal8, has reiterated that "in
India the law is well-settled that the property of an intestate dying without leaving lawful heirs,
and the property of a dissolved Corporation, passes to the Government by escheat or as bona
vacantia" and that "if the Company had a subsisting interest in the lease on the date of
dissolution, such interest much necessarily vest in the Government by escheat or as bona
vacantia.
It is not only the tangible property that comes within the ambit of Doctrine of Escheat or bona
vacantia. The word property, when used without any qualification or limitation, as above, is a

5 (1859-61) 8 Moo Ind App 500 at PP. 525.


6 Biswanath Khan And Ors. v. Prafulla Kumar Khan, AIR 1988 Calcutta 275.
7 AIR 1969 SC 843.
8 AIR 1967 Allahabad 405. This ruling was upheld by the Supreme Court in AIR 1980
SC 575.
10 | P a g e

term of the widest import. In the case of J.K. Trust v. Commissioner of Income Tax9, it was
stated that Property signifies every possible interest which a person may acquire. There should,
therefore, be no doubt that the expression property used without any qualification or limitation
would even include a tenant's interest in the demised land or premises. The interest of a Tenant is
usually heritable as well as transferable and it would be trite to say that only owner of a property,
however limited, can transfer or transmit the same10. This reasoning was upheld in the case
of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay v. Lala Pancham11, wherein it was held that the
tenant has, under the Transfer of Property Act or the Rent Control Legislations, an interest in the
demised

premises

which

would

squarely

fall

within

the

expression

property.

3. ANALYSIS OF LAWS BY GOVERNMENT


This chapter analyze the law imposed by the government regarding escheat

3.1 Escheat in Common English law


One consequence of the Land Registration Act 1925 was that only estates in land (freehold or
leasehold) could be registered. Land held directly by the Crown, known as property in the
"Royal Demesne" is not held under any feudal tenure and there is therefore no estate to register.
This has had the consequence that freeholds that escheated to the Crown ceased to be registrable.
This created a slow leak of property out of registration, amounting to some hundreds of freehold
titles in each year.
The problem was noted by the Law Commission in their report "Land Registration for the
Twenty-First Century". The Land Registration Act 2002 was passed in response to that report. It
provides that land held in demesne by the Crown may be registered.
9 AIR 1957 SC 846.
10 AIR 1988 Calcutta 275.
11 AIR 1965 SC 1008.
11 | P a g e

3.2 Escheat in Hindu law


The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 applies if the intestate is Hindu, Buddhist, Jain or Sikh but
doesnt

automatically

include

scheduled

tribes.

It

also

includes

legitimate

or illegitimate children, if one of his/her parents is Hindu, Buddhist, Jain or Sikh.It also includes
converts and reconverts to these religions.
When a Hindu male dies intestate i.e. without a will, and has not married a non-Hindu, the right
of succession first devolves upon the Class 1 heirs, if any. If even one such heir exists, all other
relatives who do not fall within this category are excluded automatically. If there are several
Class 1 heirs, then there are certain rules as to how they will share the properties amongst
themselves.
The widow (or widows), mother and each of the children (son or daughter, the law makes no
distinction) take equal shares. Where one or more of such sons or daughters is no more, then, the
Class 1 heirs in that branch will all jointly stand in the place left behind by such deceased son or
daughter. To understand this rule, imagine a tree. It has two branches. Each branch has two
twigs. Now, assume that the main trunk of the tree which we have taken as an example, is the
deceased Hindu male whose property we are now attempting to divide. The Hindu male has two
children who are represented by the two branches. If both are alive, both get equal shares, that is
to say, half and half. If, however, one child is no more, leaving behind two children of his own
(the two twigs in our example), then, each such grandchild will not share equally with the
surviving child of the deceased Hindu male, but will jointly take whatever, their father or mother
would have been entitled to, had their father or mother been alive. So in our example, the two
twigs would get only the same share as one branch, and would not share in equal thirds with the
surviving branch.
The law makes no distinction between natural and adopted children.
If the widow of a pre-deceased son or the widow of a pre-deceased son of a pre-deceased son has
remarried, she is not entitled to receive the inheritance.
12 | P a g e

In case no Class-I heirs are available, Class-II heirs, in the diagram below are considered.
Among the heirs specified in Class II, those in the preceding entry take the property
simultaneously and in exclusion to those in the subsequent entries.
In case of no Class-I or Class-II heirs being available, the property then goes to first,
the deceaseds agnates or relatives through male lineage and if still no heir is available,
his cognates, or any relative through the lineage of males or females. Two people are called
Agnates of each other if they are related (by blood or by adoption) wholly through males.
Agnates could be males or females. Thus, a fathers brothers daughter is an Agnate but a
fathers sisters son is not an Agnate because the relation is not entirely through males. On the
other hand, two people are called Cognates of each other if they are related (by blood or by
adoption) but not wholly through males. Cognates could be males or females. A mothers
brothers daughter or a fathers sisters son is a Cognate because the relationship is not wholly
through males. The relationship of Agnates and Cognates does not extend to those relationships
which arise because of marriage. Among two or more Agnates/ Cognates, the order of succession
is that the heir who has fewer or no degrees of ascent is preferred. If the degrees are same then
those who have fewer or no degrees of descent are preferred.
If someone leaves behind neither Class 1, nor Class 2 heirs, nor has any agnates, nor any
cognates his entire property lapses to the Government. This is called escheat.
The property of a Hindu female dying intestate i.e. without a will, devolves in the following
order:
(A) Firstly, upon her sons and daughters (including the children of any pre-deceased children)
and husband;
(B) Secondly, upon the heirs of her husband;
(c) Thirdly, upon her parents
(d) Fourthly, upon the heirs of her father
(e) Fifthly, upon the heirs of her mother
13 | P a g e

The order of succession is in the order given above. Thus, the heirs in the preceding entry take
the property simultaneously and in exclusion to all others. Thus, the children and husband of a
Hindu female take the property in preference to all other heirs specified. The order of devolution
as regards her husbands heirs would be as if it were her husbands property and he had died
intestate. The same principle would apply as regards devolution on her fathers heirs.
S.15 (2) 12carves out an exception to the order of succession specified above. In case of a Hindu
female dying intestate and without any issue or any children or any predeceased children, any
property inherited by her from her parents shall not devolve upon her husband or his heirs but
revert to her natal family. Similarly, in case a Hindu female dies intestate and without any issue
or any children or any predeceased children, then any property inherited by her from her husband
or her father-in-law devolves upon the heirs of her husband. Thus, property inherited from her
husband would not devolve upon her father or his heirs.
Both the above provisions of s.15 (2) would only apply if the female dies without leaving behind
any children or children of any predeceased children. If she has left behind any children, then
they would take the property in preference to all other heirs. Further, the provisions only apply to
inherited property and not property acquired by way of a will or under a gift.
3.3. Escheat in Muslim law
Where a deceased Muslim has no legal heir under Muslim law, his properties are inherited by
Government through the process of escheat. State is regarded as the ultimate heir of every
deceased.
The Doctrine of Escheat is accepted by Muslim Law. However, the property escheated does not
devolve upon the Government by way of inheritance as ultimus haeres but as bait-ul-mal (public
treasury) for the benefit of Mussalmans only.
According to Sunni Law, on failure of all the heirs and successors, the property of a deceased
Sunni Mohammedan escheats to the Government

12 The Hindu succession act , 1956


14 | P a g e

According to Shia Law, on failure of all the natural heirs, the property of a deceased Shia
Mohammedan escheats to the Government.
3.4. Escheat in Christian law
Christians in India have had different laws on succession. The British Indian Government
enacted the Indian Succession Act of 1865 on the recommendations of the 3rd Law Commission.
This Act was intended to be applied to different communities in British India who did not have a
law of their own in matters of succession. It was specifically provided that it would not apply in
the case of Hindus, Muhammadans, Buddhists, Sikhs or Jains. But its provisions were to apply in
the case of Christians.
The Indian Succession Act of 1865 was comprehensively amended and consolidated by the
Indian Succession Act of 1925. Neither the Indian Succession Act of 1865, nor the Act of 1925
was to apply to Christians in the whole of India. Section 332 of the Act of 1865 contained a
provision which empowered the State Governments to exempt any race, sect or tribe or any part
of such race, sect or tribe from the operation of the Act, by way of a notification. A similar
provision was enacted under Section 3 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. In exercise of this
power, the Native Christians in the province of Coorg (Mysore) were exempted from the
application of the provisions of the Indian Succession Act. The Khasis and Jyentengs in the
Khasi and Jaintia hills in North East India were also exempted. The Mundas and Oraons in the
province of Bihar and Orissa are also exempted from the application of the provisions of the
Indian Succession Act. By virtue of the provisions of the Goa, Daman and Diu (Administration)
Act, 1962, it is the Portuguese Civil Code and not the Indian Succession Act that applies in Goa.
In Pondicherry, the French Civil Code still survives as per the provisions of the Treaty of
Cession. And the Garos of Meghalaya are also not subject to the provisions of the Indian
Succession Act and they follow their customary matrilineal system of inheritance. This
protection is granted by the Constitution of India and also by Section 29(2) of the Indian
Succession Act, 1925.
In the absence of lineal descendants and kindred to the deceased, the property shall go to the
Government. The Collector has power to issue notification directing claimants to such properties
15 | P a g e

to prefer and establish their claims under Regulation No. VII of 1817, clauses 6 to 9 read with
clause 5 of standing Order No.197. But when a claim of escheat is put forward by the
Government the onus lies heavily on the appellant to prove the absence of any heir of the
respondent anywhere in the world. Before the plea of escheat can be entertained there must be a
public notice given by the Government so that if there is any claimant anywhere in the country
or for that matter in the world, he may come forward to contest the claim of the State. When the
state takes the property it does so subject to the liabilities of the

deceased.

Apart from all these situations, there are instances of complications in matters of succession
involving priests and nuns. In such cases, the first and foremost hurdle is that though Succession
Act has not contemplated or incorporated the principle of civil death, yet the courts have tried to
bring in that principle through the interpretative process
3.5. Escheat in State laws
The Andhra Pradesh State Legislature enacted the Andhra Pradesh Escheats and Bona Vacantia
Act, 1974 (Act No. 35 of 1974) for the determination, custody and disposal of property in the
State of Andhra Pradesh by escheat or lapse or as Bona Vacantia for want of a rightful owner and
of unclaimed property and for matters connected therewith.
The Orissa Escheat act, 1979
The Orissa Escheats Act, 1979 was enacted by the State Legislature to provide for a uniform
procedure for regulation, control and management of escheated property. The Act applies to all
properties which according to the Constitution of India or any other law have vested or shall vest
in the State by escheat, lapse or as bona vacantia. Under Section 4(2) of the Act, the Collector
becomes the custodian of escheated properties.
4.

NECESSITY OF ESCHEAT

4.1 .Introduction `

16 | P a g e

The most common reason that an escheat takes place is that an individual dies intestate, meaning
without a valid will indicating who is toinherit his or her property, and without relatives who are
legally entitled to inherit in the absence of a will. A state legislature has the authorityto enact an
escheat statute. Escheat is a concept in Land Law. It means the reversion of land to the State on
failure of heirs of the owner or on his outlawry.
The concept of Escheat has been derived from the feudal rules that, where an estate in fee simple
comes to an end, the land reverts to the State by whose ancestors or predecessors the estate was
originally created. The aim of Escheat is that no land should be left in limbo and owner-less.
4.2 Right of government to take property
In feudal England, escheat was a privilege exclusively given to the king. The policy of inheritanc
e was to preserve the wealth of noblefamilies by permitting one individual to inherit an entire est
ate. There was no writing of wills that would leave property to several heirsbecause that would h
ave the effect of breaking up the estate. In addition, the law established a hierarchy of heirs who
stood in line to inheritthe estate. If there was no living person of a designated class to inherit, the
king took the property by escheat.
Historically, reasons existed for escheat apart from the absence of heirs to inherit a decedent's pr
operty. When corporations were subject tostrict regulation, it was unlawful for a corporation to o
wn property in any way not permitted by its state-granted charter. Any property beyondthat need
ed by the corporation for the operation of its business, or in excess of the amount designated in it
s charter, or held for a period oftime beyond that which was permitted, was subject to escheat.
Certain states mandated escheat of property belonging to religious societies that either promoted
Polygamy or neglected to incorporate asrequired by law. Additionally, where public lands were p
rovided for settlers, statutes frequently made provisions for escheat when oneindividual took pos
session of more than the permitted acreage or did not properly cultivate the homestead.
Escheat statutes vary by state, but all prescribe a procedure for location of the rightful owner. In
some states title to certain types of propertyautomatically passes to the state when it escheats for
lack of a proper claimant. In other states, a required period of time must elapse priorto the comm
17 | P a g e

encement of escheat proceedings. This does not bar a claimant from stating his or her claim befo
re completion of the escheatproceedings. Some laws require claimants to assert their rights withi
n a period of time or forfeit them. Often, states mandate that individualsadministering estates not
ify the state government of the existence of property that might be subject to escheat.
The primary burden of proving that there is no proper individual entitled to own the property in q
uestion rests with the state, and the generalrules regarding the admissibility of evidence are appli
cable. Rules of presumption, such as the common-law presumption of death after aseven-year dis
appearance, can be used to support the case of the state. After the state has proved a legally suffi
cient case, any individualclaiming a right to the property has an opportunity to go forward and ar
gue against the evidence submitted by the state.
Some states offer money to informers who notify the state of property that might be subject to es
cheat. Informers might be required toprovide evidence and pursue the case to a conclusion befor
e they will be entitled to a fee. Other states provide compensation for anescheater, a person appoi
nted by the court to manage the claim of the state for escheat. An escheater is entitled to be paid
a reasonableamount even if he or she does not succeed in recovering the property for the state.

4.3 Objective of the Doctrine of Escheat


Ordinarily, the property subject to escheat is all the property within the state belonging to the ori
ginal owner upon his or her death. Althoughinitially the doctrine was applicable solely to real pr
operty, it presently extends to Personal
Property, including such intangibles as bankaccounts and shares of stock. Certain other types of
property can be the subject of escheat for lack of a known owner. The determination iscontingent
upon state law.
Unclaimed or abandoned property escheats to the state under some statutes. However, the state c
annot merely declare property abandonedand appropriate it. Such laws must function within cons
titutional limits by observing the requirements imposed by DUE PROCESS. The state isrequired to
adopt a routine procedure for notifying the public and must provide potential claimants an opport
18 | P a g e

unity to argue that the propertymight belong to them. Without declaring that certain abandoned p
roperty has been escheated, the state may lawfully possess the propertyand hold it for a period of
time so that claims can be asserted. A state is not mandated to take over unclaimed property but
may choose toexercise the power to escheat only when the value of the property does not exceed
the expense of legal proceedings.
Items subject to escheat under various statutes include abandoned bank accounts, deposits left wi
th utility companies, stock dividendswhose owners cannot be found; unpaid wages; unclaimed le
gacies from the estate of a deceased relative; insurance money to unknownbeneficiaries; and unc
laimed money retained by employers or public officials.
Certain statutes specify that the property of charitable or religious institutions escheats upon diss
olution if its donors have not retained theright to recover it when it is no longer used for religious
or charitable objectives.

19 | P a g e

5.

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

Escheat is distinguishable from Forfeiture even though both terms refer to a relinquishment of pr
operty. Forfeiture can be applied to any typeof property interest, including possession, the right t
o inherit, or the right of reversion. In addition, forfeiture often is used as a penalty againstan indi
vidual who has an interest in property, for an illegal act. An escheat takes place due to the lack of
any person with a valid interest inthe property, and is not usually linked to any illegality or wron
gdoing.Succession is the passing of a decedent's property to his or her heirs. Escheat is not treate
d in law like succession; the two concepts are completely separate. Since there is a contract
between the people and the state it is no wrong to take the right of the ownerless property. Since
it is for the welfare of the state and again which again goes back to the welfare of the people. So
it is concluded that the contract prevails between the state and government therefore it is nothing
wrong in giving away the property to the state government which will be misused by individual.
Instead government taking away the ownerless property for the welfare of the state is much
better than to be in hands of individual who has no right over the land or to be left ownerless.

20 | P a g e

Bibliography
Dr. Poonam Pradhan Saxena , Family Law Lectures: Family Law II, third edition, lexis nexis
publicartion
Sir dinshaw fardunji mulla , mulla hindu law,21st edition, lexis nexis publication
S.T. Gibson, "The Escheatries, 13271341", English Historical Review, 36(1921).
Rao,G.C.V. Subba.Family law in India.Tenth edition.Ed. T.V.Subba rao.Hyderabad:S.Gogia
&Company,2011.Print.
www.lawnotes.in referred on 1st April 2015

21 | P a g e