CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION v. The State of Goa, Thr. The Chief

Judgment

) :-

1. The two Writ Petitions, namely, WP No. 81 of 2025 and WP – F – 2486 of 2025 placed before us raise a challenge to the Goa Succession, Special Notaries and Inventory Proceedings (Amendment) Act, 2022, and the Goa Succession, Special Notaries and Inventory Proceedings (Amendment) Act, 2023, which has resulted in amending and substituting Section 52, 72, 76, 77 and 83 of the Goa Succession, Special Notaries and Inventory Proceedings Act, 2012 (Act of 2012). The Petitioners seek a declaration that the amendments in the Act of 2012 are ultra vires the Constitution, as it has resulted in imposition of absolute and arbitrary restrictions on the right of a person to bequeath or gift any property constituting his estate. Challenge is also raised to the retrospective effect of the said amendment as it is contended that the amendment Act of 2023 has the Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 3/119 WP 81-25.doc effect of taking away ‘Vested rights,’ that are accrued and this being done without any nexus, object or purpose, it is, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

2. Along with the two Writ Petitions, we have Miscellaneous Civil Applications filed by individual parties seeking intervention/ impleadment being MCA-F- 2610 of 2025 and MCA-F- 2666 of 2025 in WP No. 81 of 2025.

3. On the pleadings being completed and a request being made that the Petitions be taken up for final hearing, we have heard the arguments advanced on behalf of the Petitioners/interveners and the private respondent in support of the challenge. We have also extensively heard the learned Advocate General, Mr. Devidas Pangam, who has defended the said challenge by strenuously urging that there exists a presumption in favour of the constitutionality of a statute and unless and until the parameters for striking a provision in a statute, which being well settled are made out, the Court shall not entertain such a challenge. By consent of the respective counsel representing the parties, on the pleadings being completed, we issue ‘Rule’, which is made returnable forthwith. For the sake of convenience, the Judgment is divided in the following parts:- Table of Contents Sr No Description A Background facts in the two Writ Petitions (1) - WP No. 81 of 2025 Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 4/119 WP 81-25.doc (2) - WP No. 2486 of 2025 (F) (3)- Miscellaneous Civil Application Nos. 2610 of 2025(F)   and 2666 of 2025 (F) Statutory scheme of Goa Succession, Special Notaries and Inventory Proceedings Act, 2012 The Goa (Amendment Act) 13 of 2022 The Goa (Amendment) Bill No.26 of  2023 The effect of Amending Acts on the existing Act of 2012 Contentions advanced by the respective counsel representing the contenders. (I) Submissions advanced in support of the invalidation  of the Amending Act of 2022 & Act of 2023. (II) Submissions on behalf of Interveners in the two Miscellaneous Civil Applications (III) Submissions of Private Respondent in WP No. 81 of 2025 B C D E F G Submissions of the Learned Advocate General on behalf of the State. H Analysis of the rival submissions and the Decision (I) Understanding the provisions of the Act of 2012 in the backdrop of the Portuguese Civil Code. (II) The Change in the order of succession,  the subject matter of challenge. (III) Guiding principles while testing validity of a law made by the Competent Legislature (IV) Challenge to the statute or statutory provision based on Article 14 of the Constitution (V) New Dimension of Article 14 - ‘Manifest Arbitrariness’ (VI) Applicability of the Principle of ‘Arbitrariness’ contemplated under Article 14 - in testing the amendments to the Act of 2012 Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 5/119 WP 81-25.doc (VII) Retrospective Effect of the Amending Act Whether result in deprivation of ‘Vested’ and ‘Crystallised’ Rights. (VIII) Effect of explanation appended to Section 52 by the Amending Act. I Conclusion of Our Analysis [A] BACKGROUND FACTS IN THE TWO WRIT PETITIONS

4. In order to appreciate the legal challenge, we must briefly refer to the facts involved, as the challenge in the Petition apart from the legal aspect has arisen in the peculiar factual backgrounds set out therein. (1) WP No. 81 of 2025 Writ Petition No. 81 of 2025, is filed by Xavier Agnelo Minguel Jose Gracias, who claim his entitlement to the estate left behind by his brother late Fransico Maximiano Menilo Costa e Gracias, who demised on 31/05/2022. As per the Petition, late Fransico expired intestate, without leaving behind any Will or disposition of his last wish. He left behind immovable properties situated at Velsao, Cansaulim, Cuelim and Pale, of Mormugao Taluka, in the State of Goa. According to the Petition, in view of the law of succession in force, as on the demise of late Fransico, on 31/05/2022, the ownership and possession of the inheritance is transmitted to the Petitioner and his siblings in terms of Section 13 read with Section 52 of the Goa Succession, Special Notaries and Inventory Proceedings Act, 2012, in the absence of any descendants and ascendants of late Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 6/119 WP 81-25.doc Fransico surviving at the time of his demise. However, the existing position, according to the Petitioner was altered by the (Amendment) Act 2022, as it brought amendment in Section 52, which altered the order of succession by placing the surviving spouse after the descendants. In other words, according to the Petitioner, by virtue of the amendment, the surviving spouse become entitled to the estate, in the absence of a descendant and prior to the Amendment Act of 2022, this entitlement was of the ascendant(s).

5. The Petitioner make a further grievance that the State brought in another (Amendment) Act of 2023, on 05/09/2023, and this Act, substituted section 52 of the parent Act that was already amended by the Amendment Act of 2022 by introducing an explanation. It also amended sections 72, 76 and 77 of the parent Act and this amendment corresponded to the changes brought about by the Amendment Act of 2022 to section 52 of the parent Act. Pertinently, it also altered the concept of legitime by amending section 83 of the parent act to now provide that the legitime of the surviving spouse and of parents would be the entire estate, whereas that of the other ascendants would be 1/3rd.

6. The Petition raise a serious objection to the provision in form of Section 1(2) of the Amendment Act of 2023 which provided that it shall be deemed to have come into force on 21st day of December, 2016, indicating its retrospective operation, having the effect of effacing rights that had vested in the Petitioner i.e. on 31/05/2022, i.e. prior to the enactment of the Amendment Act of 2023. Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 7/119 WP 81-25.doc The Writ Petition filed by Xavier Agnelo Minguel Jose Gracias, therefore, raises a challenge to the Amendment Act of 2022 and the Amendment Act of 2023 by pleadings thus:- “9. The said Amendment Act of 2022 and the Amendment Act of 2023 are not only ultra vires of the Constitution of India and violative of the rule of law, but also results in arbitrarily depriving the Petitioner of his right to the estate that vested in him in terms of the parent Act, and to the property, under the Constitution of lndia.”

7. The Petition has raised the following grounds:- I “The Amendment Act of 2022 and the Amendment Act of 2023 is in contravention of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. II The Amendment Act of 2023 has the effect of taking away vested rights accrued to the Petitioner without any nexus, object or purpose, and is, therefore, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of rights guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. III The Amendment Act of 2023 is susceptible to judicial review and warrants a declaration of unconstitutionality from this honourable Court in terms of the law laid down by the Constitutional Bench of the honourable Supreme Court in the case of Chairman, Railway Board & Others. v. C. R. Rangadhamaiah & Others. (1997) 6 SCC 623 and later followed in the case of Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd. v. Registrar, Cooperative Societies & Others (2024) 4 SCC 363. IV The Amendment Act of 2023 runs contrary to, and is in the teeth of, cardinal principle of jurisprudence that rights vested and accrued under the existing laws cannot be taken away or impaired by an amendment with a retrospective effect. V The amendment to section 52, as initially brought about by section 4 of the Amendment Act of 2022, and the same section 52 as substituted by the Amendment Act of 2023, overlooks the antecedent enactments on the subject. A Decree has earlier come to be enacted on 31.10.1910 whereby the order of succession was altered by entitling spouse to the Estate, in absence of ascendants and descendants. The change brought about by the said Decree dated 31.10.1910 came to be withdrawn by virtue of Decree No. 19.126 dated 16.12.1930, which was brought into force with effect from 01.01.1931. VI The 2023 Amendment imposes absolute and arbitrary restriction on the right of a person to bequeath or gift any property constituting his estate if does not have a descendant as on the date of his demise. Such restriction is arbitrary and Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 8/119 WP 81-25.doc causes an unintelligible differentiation which is contrary to the constitutional scheme, and more particularly Article 14 of the Constitution of India.”

8. Another significant aspect, which is highlighted in the Petition is, the inventory proceedings which were instituted by the Petitioner before the Civil Judge, at Vasco-da-Gama, being registered as Inventory Proceedings No. 4 of 2023. It is stated that in the wake of the Amendment Act, 2023, an issue was raised about the maintainability of the proceedings by the surviving spouse, who claimed to be now exclusively entitled to the estate left behind the deceased. The Petition pleads that by judgment and order dated 27/02/2024, the Court rejected the inventory proceeding in view of Section 1(2) of the Amendment Act of 2023, which declared that the amendment shall be deemed to have come into force on 21/12/2016. The Petition however proceed to state that the Petitioner has assailed the said judgment in first appeal, which is founded on the ground that the Civil Judge has committed an error in interpreting the Amendment Act of 2023, by effacing rights vested in the Petitioner prior to its enactment. (2) WP No. 2486 of 2025

9. In the second Writ Petition, the Petitioners, two senior citizens, Shantaram Jaywant Chanekar and Shubhangi Shantaram Chanekar, are the parents of Late Shri. Siddesh Shantaram Chanekar, who demised on 22/03/2019. The Respondent No.1 to the Petition is Smt. Rushina Siddesh Chanekar, widow of their son. Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 9/119 WP 81-25.doc The Petitioners claim that since there was no offspring out of the marriage and they are the legal ascendants and ‘heirs’ in terms of the law of succession prevailing at the time of his death. The Respondent No.1, the widow and moiety holder of their late son, instituted inventory proceedings for partition of the estate left behind by her husband, the proceedings being registered as Regular Inventory Proceeding No. 414/2019/D before the Civil Judge, Junior Division, ‘D’ Court at Mapusa, Goa. The Petitioners were named as interested parties in the said proceedings, being legal heirs of the deceased.

10. It is the case of the Petitioners, that under the unamended Section 52 of the Goa Succession, Special Notaries, and Inventory Proceedings Act, 2012, which determine the order of legal succession, they were entitled for precedence over the surviving spouse i.e. Respondent No.1. Upon the introduction of the Amendment Act of 2022, the Respondent No.1 filed an application seeking deletion of the Petitioners impleaded as interested parties nos.1 and 1(a) by contending that by virtue of the amended provision, the estate of the deceased devolved exclusively upon her, as the surviving spouse. According to the Petitioners, the 2022 amendment came into effect from 8/11/2022 but by the (Amendment) Act, 2023, which further substituted sub-section (1) of Section 52, was given a retrospective effect in terms of sub-section (2) of Section 1 of the Act, and it was deemed to have come into force on 21/12/2016. The aforesaid development, therefore, resulted in the Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 10/119 WP 81-25.doc application filed by Respondent No.1 being allowed on 10/04/2024, directing the Petitioners to be dropped from the inventory proceedings. The said order being challenged before the District Judge – 2, Mapusa, resulted into dismissal of the appeal, thereby confirming the order passed by the Civil Judge. The further development set out in the Petition is the institution of First Appeal before the High Court of Bombay at Goa.

11. The Petitioners claim that they are gravely prejudiced by the amendment to Section 52 of the Act of 2012 and the impugned order passed by the Civil Judge, in the Inventory Proceeding which is upheld in an Appeal. The Petition has categorically set out the grounds in support of its relief, seeking a declaration and specific reference is made to the various provisions in the Portuguese Civil Code, 1867, which had provided for devolution of intestate succession. The Petition has also traced the scheme of succession in Goa and it is pleaded that for more than a century the law has been, that the parents are next in the line of succession in the absence of any descendants of a deceased estate- leaver. According to the Petitioners, the unique system of marriage, and the law governing the property of spouses, in Goa, which recognized the system of communion of assets, where the spouses are joint owners and sharers of the property held by them, i.e. self acquired, jointly acquired, or brought into communion through succession, gift, or otherwise. The Petition makes reference to the relevant articles in the Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 11/119 WP 81-25.doc Portuguese Civil Code, and on the basis of which, according to the Petition, marriage is an essential contract between two consenting parties and it is with intention and keeping in consonance with the law recognizing marriage as purely a civil contract, the surviving spouse was placed below the descendants, ascendants, and siblings and their descendants, if they predeceased the estate-leaver. Thus, according to the Petitioners, the amendment in Section 52 of the Goa Succession, Special Notaries and Inventory Proceedings Act of 2012 runs contrary to the concept of legal heirship and the historical order of succession as followed by the Portuguese Civil Code, 1867 in Goa for more than a century which is otherwise a just, equitable and sound law. (3) Miscellaneous Civil Application Nos. 2610 /2025 & 2666 / 2025

12. In Writ Petition No. 81 of 2025, a Civil Application is taken out by Arjun Chandrakant Gaude, seeking his impleadment, as he claims to be a interested party in Inventory Proceeding No. 87 of 2025, which is filed upon the death of Late. Raghunath Atmaram Shetgaonkar and late Mahalaxmi Raghunath Shetgaonkar who are the in-laws of the Applicant. Since the Applicant gained knowledge about the Petition being filed raising a challenge to the (Amendment) Act, 2022 and the (Amendment) Act, 2023 by which amendments are brought in Act of 2012, which has altered the order of succession, thereby placing the surviving spouse after descendants, on the basis that the outcome of the Petition will also have bearing on the Applicant’s case, the Applicant seeks intervention.

13. Another Application is filed by Mr. Bhuvaneshwar Faterpekar and three others. The Application proceed to state that the Applicants Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 12/119 WP 81-25.doc being residents of Goa are practicing Advocates before the Court and Applicant no.1 has been recently elected as people’s representative i.e. ward member of village Panchayat of Carambolim. According to the Applicants, the amendment introduced in the Goa Succession, Special Notaries and Inventory Proceedings Act, 2012, had amended the waterfall mechanism in pertinence to succession to estate, whereby the surviving spouse earlier was at serial no. (iv), but now placed at serial no.(iii). The Applicant specifically plead that the amendment though pertaining to succession, has a direct connection and bearings to the rights under the Civil Code in as much as it pertain to civil marriage, and therefore, the Applicants deemed it appropriate to intervene and request for being heard in the Petition which has raised a challenge to the Amendment Act, 2022 and 2023, as even according to them, the amendments are contrary to law and they are manifestly arbitrary, irrational and ex-facie based on whims / preferences rather than reason and principle. [B] STATUTORY SCHEME OF GOA SUCCESSION, SPECIAL NOTARIES AND INVENTORY PROCEEDINGS ACT, 2012

14. With the above background of the proceedings before us, we must refer to the statutory scheme under the Goa Succession Act of

2012. The Goa Succession, Special Notaries and Inventory Proceedings Act, 2012, was passed by the Legislative Assembly of Goa on 5/08/2016 and received assent of the Governor on 19/09/2016. Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 13/119 WP 81-25.doc The said Act consolidate and amend the law of intestate and testamentary succession, notarial law and the laws relating to partition of an inheritance. It extend to the whole of the State of Goa and is applicable to the category of persons, who are specified in clause (4) of Section 1 of the Act, 2012.

15. The Statement of Objects and Reasons (SOR) of the 2012 Act has set out its purport, being the need to consolidate various provisions of law into one comprehensive, rational and integrated legislation, to facilitate their application and its implementation by the Bench, the Bar and the litigants. Statement of Objects and Reasons of the 2012 Act record thus:- “Considering the need to take into account the social changes and the new situations arising from the fact that Goa is now a State of the Union of India and Goans are citizens of India and considering also that the Laws which in force were applicable to an altogether different set of political circumstances, it has become necessary to amend the Law to meet the present day requirements and to make it workable. Further, in view of noteworthy new principles that have evolved, a more humane and fair outlook is now taken on illegitimacy, on mentally challenged persons and on such other persons upon whom a stigma was cast in the past for no fault of theirs. These principles and outlook have been adopted in framing the present law. That object is sought to be achieved by this Bill which deals with the Law of Succession, Special Notaries and the Inventory proceedings. While drafting the Bill, the following Legislations have been kept in view: (a) The provisions of the Portuguese Civil code enacted in Portugal in 1966, replacing the Civil Code of 1867 and the Code of Civil Procedure of 28- 12-2961, replacing the Code of Civil Procedure of 1939, as well as Decrees amending from time to time many provisions of the aforesaid Code on the subject of succession and inventory and Notarial Law, and the Law approved by Decree Law No. 207 dated 14-08-1995 and amendments thereto. (b) The Provisions of Louisianan Civil Code, 1870 (based on Napoleon Code), in force in the state of Louisiana of the United States of America as originally enacted, and the subsequent amendment included by Act of 1981 No. 919 effective after 31-12-1981 and Act of 1990 No. 147 with effect from 1-7- 1990. Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 14/119 WP 81-25.doc (c) (d) Legislation in force in the rest of India. There are some original provisions which have been incorporated bearing in mind the present circumstances. The subject of succession, partition, execution of wills with corresponding notarial acts and inventory proceeding meant for partition of the estate through the Court fall within the purview of entry 5 of List III-Concurrent List of the seventh schedule to the Constitution of India and in view of section 5 of the aforesaid Goa, Daman and Diu (Administration) Act, 1962, the Legislature of the State of Goa is competent to enact Law on the subject.”

16. One of the key feature of the Act of 2012 is its provision for succession as contained in Part II. As per Section 3, ‘Succession’ is the transmission of the estate of a deceased person in favour of his successors, and successor is the person who is called to succeed the juridical relations of the deceased person and upon whom the assets and liabilities devolve. For the purpose of Part II succession may be intestate or legal and testamentary. Testamentary succession is described to be the succession which results from a will left by the estate leaver and a testamentary heir is a heir instituted by a will. Intestate succession is either free or forced and forced succession is the one which is reserved by law to the forced heirs and places restrictions on the freedom of the estate leaver to dispose of his estate.

17. According to the Act of 2016, the ‘Successors’ are Heirs and Legatees and ‘Heir’ is the person who inherits or succeeds to the totality of the estate of the estate leaver or to an undefined share thereof, without specifying the assets constituting it, whereas ‘Legatee’ is the one who succeeds to specific and determined assets. A person who succeeds to the remainder of the estate when the assets Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 15/119 WP 81-25.doc constituting the remainder are not determined, is an ‘Heir’. According to Section 6, Inheritance or succession of a deceased would comprise of all the properties, rights and obligations which he leaves upon death, though it is clarified that a person’s right which by their very nature or by operation of law, extinguish upon death of the title holder, and do not form part of the inheritance.

18. In terms of the Act of 2016, the succession opens upon the death of the estate leaver and Section 8 prescribes the place where the succession opens. All persons, who are born or conceived at the time of opening of the succession are competent to succeed, unless the law provides otherwise. The statute also prescribe a disqualification to succeed, by reason of unworthiness like a person convicted for commission of murder, a person convicted for defamation or for giving false evidence, a person who by deceit or coercion, induce a estate leaver to make, revoke or modify a will, or obstruct him from doing so etc. As per Section 13, the moment the estate leaver dies, the ownership and possession of the inheritance is transmitted to the heirs, whether testamentary or intestate.

19. Chapter IV of the Act provide for Acceptance of inheritance, which shall be unconditional and it prescribe that the acceptance or renunciation of an inheritance is entirely voluntary and free act, with a clarification that a person who renounces inheritance which devolves on him by one title is not, for that reason, debarred from accepting inheritance, which devolves on him by another title. However, Section 24 of the Act declare that it is not lawful for a Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 16/119 WP 81-25.doc person to accept or renounce an inheritance in part, or for a certain time limit or conditionally. Section 45 included in Chapter V has set out the liabilities of inheritance and Section 46 prescribe that the creditors of the inheritance and the legatees have priority over the personal creditors of the heir and the creditors of the inheritance. Under this scheme, the ‘Heir’ shall retain, as against the inheritance, till partition, all the rights and obligations vis-a-vis the deceased, with the exception of those who get extinguished upon the death of the estate leaver.

20. For the purposes of the challenge before us, we must take note of Chapter VI, under the heading of ‘Legal Succession’, as Section 51 prescribe that where any person dies without making a disposition of his assets or making disposition of only a part thereof or, having made a will, and the will is annulled, revoked, reduced or it lapses, his legal heirs shall inherit the assets or part thereof. Section 52, which is the subject matter of challenge in the present writ petitions, prescribe the order of legal succession and the said section introduced in the Act of 2016 read thus:- “52. Order of legal succession.- (1) The legal succession shall devolve in the following order:- (i) On the descendants; (ii) On the ascendants, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 72; (iii) on the brothers and their descendants; (iv) on the surviving spouse; (v) on the collaterals not comprised in clause (iii) upto the 6th degree; (vi) on the State, provided that, in the absence of testamentary or intestate heir of a beneficial owner or of an emphyteusis, the property shall revert to the direct owner. (2) In respect of persons referred to in clauses (i), (ii) and (iii) of sub-section (1), the agricultural produce or fruits, gathered or growing, meant and necessary for the maintenance of the couple shall be deemed to be the personal Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 17/119 WP 81-25.doc property of the surviving spouse, provided that on the date of the opening of the inheritance there is no suit for divorce or separation of persons and properties, pending or decreed.”

21. The Act of 2016 in Chapter VIII provide the Order of Succession of children and their descendants/ascendants as well as the Ascendants of Second Degree and the Succession of brothers/sisters and their descendants. Section 77 in the Act is the provision for succession of surviving spouse, which read thus:- “77. Succession of Surviving Spouse.- In default of descendants, ascendants, brothers, sisters and their descendants, the surviving spouse shall succeed, provided that at the time of the death of the other spouse, they were not divorced or there had been no judicial separation of spouses and assets by a decision which had become final.”

22. Similarly, Section 82 included in Chapter IX is a provision prescribing Preferential right of habitation and use of the surviving spouse and it read thus:- “82. Preferential right of habitation and use of surviving spouse. - (1) The surviving spouse of the estate leaver shall have the right to exclusive habitation of the residential house of the family and the right to use the movables and other objects or utensils intended for the comfort, service and decoration of the house. If such claim is made, the value of the right of habitation and use shall be determined and the surviving spouse shall pay owelty to the heirs if the value of right of habitation and use exceeds the value of her moiety and share, if any.”

23. Although, the Act refer to certain other important provision, in form of inventory proceedings, at this juncture, it is not necessary for us to make a reference to the same, as we would be referring to them at the relevant stage of our discussion. [C] THE GOA (AMENDMENT ACT) 13 OF 2022

24. The Goa Succession Special Notaries and Inventory Proceedings (Amendment) bill 2022, was introduced by the legislative assembly of Goa for amending the Act of 2012. Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 18/119 WP 81-25.doc This bill amended Section 52 of the Principle Act by inserting the following item (a) after item (i),the following item shall be inserted, namely:- “(ia) on the surviving spouse;”; The amending Act substituted the following (b) for item (iii) namely “(iii) on the brothers and sisters and their descendants;”; (c) item (iv) came to be amended. Upon enactment of the amendment Act, the surviving spouse followed the descendants and the existing clause (iii) was substituted by brothers and sisters and their descendants and clause (iv) surviving spouse, since transposed above was deleted. The SOR of the amending Act, which sought to amend Section 52 of the Act of 2016, expressed its intention to rectify the order of legal succession, and several other provisions in the Act, were also amended, as it sought to achieve the object set out therein. [D] THE GOA (AMENDMENT) BILL NO.26 OF 2023

25. The Goa Succession Special Notaries and Inventory Proceedings Act, bill 2023 was further enacted by the legislative assembly of Goa and sub-section (2) of Section 1, prescribed that the amendment shall be deemed to have come into force on 21/12/2016 and in Section 52 of the Act of 2012 for sub-section (1), the following sub-section was substituted; ‘(1) The legal succession shall devolve in the following order:- (i) on the descendants; (ii) on the surviving spouse; (iii) on the ascendants, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 72; (iv) on the brothers and sisters and their descendants; (v) on the collaterals not comprised in clause (iv) upto the 6 th degree; (vi) on the State, provided that, in the absence of testamentary or intestate heir of a Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 19/119 WP 81-25.doc beneficial owner or of an emphyteusis, the property shall revert to the direct owner. Explanation:- The provisions of this sub-section as amended by Goa Succession, Special Notaries and Inventory Proceeding (Amendment) Act, 2023 shall be applicable to the cases/appeals pending before different courts, however the said amendment shall not disturb the rights which got crystallized before the enactment of the said Act, 2023. The amending Act also introduced amendment in Section 83 of the principal Act, with relation to the disposable portion and the existing provision stood substituted by the following provision:- “83. Disposable portion.- The portion which the testator may freely dispose off shall be called the disposable portion and it shall consist of half of the estate of the estate leaver, except as provided hereunder:- (a) Legitime of the descendants: Where the estate leaver has children or descendants at the time of his death, their legitime shall consist of half of the inheritance. (b) Legitime of the spouse: Where the estate leaver has no children or descendants at the time of his death but his spouse is alive, her legitime shall consist of entire inheritance. (c) Legitime of the parents: Where the estate leaver has no children or descendants and spouse at the time of his death but either his mother or father is alive, their legitime shall consist of entire inheritance. (d) Legitime of other ascendants: Where the estate leaver has at the time of his death ascendants other than the father or mother, their legitime shall consist of one third of the inheritance.”

26. The statements of objects and reasons of the said amending Act 2023 read thus:- “STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS The order of legal succession as laid down under sub-section (1) of section 52 of the Goa Succession, Special Notaries and Inventory Proceeding Act, 2012 (Goa Act 23 of 2016) (hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”) was rectified by carrying out an amendment to said sub-section (1) of section 52 vide the Goa Succession, Special Notaries and Inventory Proceeding (Amendment) Act, 2022 (Goa Act 13 of 2022). The said Amendment Act, 2022 came into force with effect from 8th Day of November, 2022. The Bill now seeks to make provision for making applicable amendment to said sub-section (1) of section 52 to pending cases/appeals, however the sai amendment shall not disturb the rights which got crystallized before the enactment of this legislation. The amendments as proposed to sections 72,76,77 and 83 of the said Act are consequential amendments which are made to bring the provisions contained in said sections in consonance with the provisions of section 52 of the said Act as amended.” Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 20/119 WP 81-25.doc [E] THE EFFECT OF AMENDING ACTS ON THE EXISTING ACT OF 2012

27. The Goa Succession, Special Notaries and Inventory proceedings (Amendment) Act 2022, and the (Amendment) Act 2023, brought in the amendments to the Act of 2012, which cumulatively has the following effect:- (a) The order of succession contemplated in section 52 of the Act of 2012 has now been altered to place the surviving spouse, second in the order of succession i.e. to succeed to the estate in the absence of descendants. The spouse under the original section 52 was placed fourth in order of succession i.e. to succeed in absence of descendants, ascendants and brothers/sisters (b) It alters the concept of legitime, in the event of a spouse succeeding to the estate. The legitime of the spouse as in the amended Section 83 of the Parent Act is the entire inheritance. This legitime under the unamended law was one half of the inheritance. (c) The Amendment Act of 2023 which has brought in the amendments are deemed to have come into force on 21/12/2016. A comparative chart showing the change in the original Section 52 of the Goa Succession Act, 2012 is drawn below to depict the changes. Section 52 Of the Parent Act, as it originally stood As amended by the Amendment Act of 2022 After substitution by Amendment Act of 2023 Sub-section (1) Sub-section (1) Sub-section (1) Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 21/119 WP 81-25.doc (1) The legal succession shall devolve in the following order:- (1) The legal succession shall devolve in the following order :- (1) The legal succession shall devolve in the following order :- (i) on the descendants; (ii) on the ascendants, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 72; (iii) on the brothers and their descendants; (iv) on the surviving spouse; (v) on the collaterals not comprised in clause (iii) upto the 6th degree; (vi) on State, provided that, in the absence of testamentary or intestate heir of a beneficial owner or of an emphyteusis, the property shall revert to the direct owner. (i) on the descendants; (ia) on the surviving spouse; (ii) on the ascendants, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 72; (iii) on the brothers and sisters descendants (v) on the collaterals not comprised in clause (iii) upto the 6th degree; State, (vi) on provided that, in the absence of testamentary or intestate heir of a beneficial owner or of an emphyteusis, the property shall revert to the direct owner. (i) on the descendants; (ii) on the surviving spouse; (iii) on the ascendants, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 72; (iv) on the brothers and sisters descendants; (v) on the collaterals not comprised in clause (iv) upto the 6th degree; (vi) on State, provided that, in the absence of testamentary or intestate heir of a beneficial owner or of an emphyteusis, the property shall revert to the direct owner. Explanation – The provisions of this sub- section is amended by the Goa Succession, Special Notaries and Inventory Proceeding (Amendment) 2023 shall be Act, applicable cases/appeals pending before different courts, however amendment disturb the rights which got crystallized before the enactment of the said Act, 2023.” Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 22/119 WP 81-25.doc [F] CONTENTIONS ADVANCED BY THE RESPECTIVE COUNSEL REPRESENTING THE CONTENDERS (I) Submissions advanced in support of the invalidation of the Amending Act of 2022 & Act of 2023.

28. Mr. Ramani appearing for the Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 81 of 2025 has mounted a challenge to the amending Acts on three counts; the challenge to the alteration of the order of succession, the retrospective application of the provision amounting to divestiture of vested rights and thirdly on the ground of alteration in the concept of legitime. Mr. Ramani would explicate his challenge to the variance in the order of succession, by submitting that Section 52 has created class of heirs to succeed to the estate, in order of preference as set out in the Act of 2016. According to him, in the wake of the amendment, the surviving spouse originally placed at fourth step, in the order of succession has moved to second. He would submit that the order of succession which was originally contemplated in the parent Act which existed in the State of Goa at least ever since 01/07/1870 i.e. when the Civil Code of 1867 was extended to overseas territories including Goa and as such for a period of more than 150 years, prior to the impugned amendments being introduced, and the asset owned by the deceased estate leaver would be dealt by the same order. It is his contention that the spouse was conferred with the following rights:- (a) The surviving spouse would be entitled for 50 % of the share (Article 1108 of the Civil Code); (b) Right to exclusive habitation and Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 23/119 WP 81-25.doc use of residential house and movables was reserved to the spouse (Section 82 of the Act of 2016); (c) Agricultural produce necessary for maintenance shall be deemed as personal property of the spouse (Section 52 (2) of the Parent Act, erstwhile Article 1969 of the Civil Code); (d) Remaining 50% would constitute the estate of the deceased and would devolve (in absence of a will) in the order of legal succession set out in Article 1969 of the Civil Code, which now is substituted by the amendment.

29. In support of the Petitioners, in WP No. 81 of 2025, Mr. Ramani would submit that, the provision as it existed prior to the impugned amendments, the surviving spouse was adequately safeguarded by vesting of 50 % of the assets of the deceased spouse and by reservation of produce from lands that constituted the estate, and only on satisfying the above, the estate devolved upon the descendant, the ascendants or brothers/sisters. However, in order to rectify the order of succession, the amending Act of 2022 brought a change which according to him, do not reflect any conceivable legitimate object nor does it intend to remedy any mischief. It is his specific submission that the classification of spouse now in second degree by taking precedence over ‘Ascendants’ and ‘Brothers/Sisters,’ the direct blood relation do not serve any legitimate object. The learned counsel would place reliance upon the decision of the Apex Court in John Vallamattom and anr vs. Union of India1, where the Apex Court declared Section 118 of the Succession Act of 1925 to be unconstitutional, when the Court rendered a finding that 1 (2023) 6 SCC, 611 Arati/ Rajeshree/ Ashish 24/119 WP 81-25.doc although Indian Christians formed a class by themselves, but there is no justiciable reason to hold that the classification made is either based on intelligible differentia or the same has any nexus with the object sought to be achieved. Reliance is also placed upon the decision in case of Dr. K. R. Lakshmanan vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Anr2 to submit that if the provision in statute is discriminatory and arbitrary it violate and infract right of equality enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution.

30. Pressing the second point of challenge about the retrospective effect given to the provision, Mr. Ramani would place reliance upon the decision in case of Chairman, Railway Board and ors vs. C.R. Rangadhamaiah and Ors3, in support of his submission that, divestiture of vested rights without any nexus to the object of the amendment made with retrospective operation is violative of Article

14. He would submit that the retrospective operation results in creation of a class of persons who would stand arbitrarily divested of the vested rights accrued by previous operation of the Act of 2016 particularly Section 8 and 13 thereof. According to Mr. Ramani, the Rule against Retrospectivity is the bedrock of not only fairness, but also the ‘Rule of Law’ which constitutes basic structure of the Constitution. He would invoke the principle laid down in the said decision, as regards the expression ‘Vested rights’ or ‘Accrued rights’ where the Apex Court has held that while striking down the impugned provisions which was given retrospective operation, so as to have an adverse effect in the matter of promotion, seniority, substantive