718 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I have not said anything like that at all. I do not think my friend is entitled to use a conversation.
Dr. Bakhshi Tek Chand : No conversation, but what you have said now on the floor of the House.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : These are matters which I alone cannot decide. I have to take the consent of my colleagues.
Mr. Deputy speaker : The Hon. Member may go on with the Bill as it is, saying that the Bill as it is does not provide for agricultural land. He need not refer to private conversations.
Dr. Bakhshi Tek Chand : Take the Bill as it is. Whether the change will be made now or later with the consent of the Cabinet or other parties is a different matter. But what is the position now. Agricultural land is being excluded. Agricultural land forms more than 80 per cent of the property of Hindus in any part of the country. Therefore our sisters, daughters and other female relations are excluded under this Bill from succession to a very large portion of property. That is another reason for which it is necessary to reconsider the Bill and not to proceed with it in its present form. Whatever law you may have, you should apply it to all property—agricultural, urban, movable or immovable.
Pandit Balkrishna Sharma (U. P. : General): If my Hon. friend will give away for a minute I would like to know, whether, if this law is applied to agricultural property also, it will not lead to veritable fragmentation of land. (Interruption.)
Mr. Deputy Speaker : Let there be no interruptions. The closure may come in at any time and I am giving a warning to the House in advance. The less the interruptions the greater is the chance for a larger number of speakers to take part.
Dr. Bakhshi Tek Chand : With regard to fragmentation I am not afraid of it. It is bound to come about if you have a larger number of heirs. If a man has five sons, there is bound to be fragmentation and if he has two daughters also there will be more fragmentation. I am not afraid of fragmentation whether with regard to immovable or urban property also. If you have one or two houses, two sons and five daughters and they decide to divide the property, there is bound to be fragmentation. Therefore, with great deference to both parties this argument is wholly extraneous and should be left out of consideration.