Back
M. R. SHAH, ANIRUDDHA BOSE
JITENDRA SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – Respondent
ORDER
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 13.03.2020 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Principal Seat at Jabalpur in M.P. No. 508 of 2019, by which the High Court has allowed the said writ petition and has quashed and set aside the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Rewa Division, Rewa, directing to mutate the name of the petitioner herein in the revenue records, which was sought to be mutated on the basis of the will, the original respondent no.6 has preferred the present special leave petition.
2. That the petitioner herein filed an application under Section 109/110 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code to mutate his name in the revenue records in respect of Khasra No. 41/03, 101/03, 314/03, 102/02, 132/02, 133/03, 142/02, 145/02, 146/02, 313/01, total area of 4.53 acres situated in village Dudha, Tehsil Rampur Baghelan, District Satna, on the basis of the alleged will executed by one Smt. Ananti Bai, widow of Bhagwandeen Bargahi – his maternal grandmother. The alleged will was executed on 20.05.1998. It is required to be noted that though initially it was the case on behalf of the petitioner that Smt. Ananti Bai di
None of the provided case excerpts indicate that *Jitendra Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh* or any of the supporting property law principles mentioned (regarding mutation and title) have been overruled, reversed, or invalidated. All provided texts cite *Jitendra Singh* as a current, authoritative precedent.
### CATEGORY: Followed/Relied Upon (Authoritative Precedent)
The following entries refer to *Jitendra Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh* (2021) as the governing law used to decide subsequent matters, particularly concerning the principle that mutation entries are for fiscal purposes and do not confer or extinguish title:
* **Akeedan VS State of U. P. - 2023 0 Supreme(All) 1971, Daya Wati Diwan Singh Shukla, Sarasvati Vidya Mandir, Inter College VS State of U. P. - 2023 0 Supreme(All) 2037, Amritansh Pandey VS State of Uttar Pradesh - 2023 0 Supreme(All) 1107, Jain Shwetamber Shri Sangh Panjikrit Sanstha VS State of Rajasthan - 2023 0 Supreme(Raj) 684, Narayan S/o Late Shri Madhulal VS Heera Lal S/o Nathu Lohar - 2023 0 Supreme(Raj) 678, Meera Devi VS Board Of Revenue Uttar Pradesh - 2023 0 Supreme(All) 1456, Harendra Singh (Manmod) VS Govind Singh - 2023 0 Supreme(MP) 909, Jai Sharma VS Kailash Narayan - 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 304, Baiyant Singh VS Paramjeet Kaur - 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 279, Paras Ram VS Ganpat Ram - 2024 0 Supreme(P&H) 822, Ramsakhi VS Mahesh Kumar - 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 695, Lh. Of Decd. Kasam Musa Makvana, Decd. Suleman Kasam Makvana (Decd) VS Decd Mariyam Kasam Makvana, W/o. Abdulla Musa Hamirka, Decd Aaisha Abdulla Hamirkha W/o. Ibrahim Haji - 2024 0 Supreme(Guj) 1774, Vinod Infra Developers Ltd. VS Mahaveer Lunia - 2025 6 Supreme 457, Karam Singh VS Amarjit Singh - 2026 1 Supreme 122, Vadiyala Prabhakar Rao VS Government of Andhra Pradesh - 2026 0 Supreme(SC) 507, Shiv Kumar Vaishya vs Shubhkaran Vaishya - 2026 Supreme(Online)(MP) 4526, Shiv Kumar Vaishya vs Shubhkaran Vaishya - 2026 Supreme(Online)(MP) 4526, Sudhirdas vs State of Madhya Pradesh - 2026 Supreme(Online)(MP) 4528:** These entries consistently cite *Jitendra Singh* as the basis for holdlings. Phrases such as "relied upon," "relevant portion," and "it has been held" confirm its status as an actively followed precedent.
### CATEGORY: Statements of Legal Principle (Affirming Status Quo)
These entries provide the substantive legal rules established or affirmed by the aforementioned line of cases:
* **Balwant Singh VS Daulat Singh - 1997 6 Supreme 385, Suman Verma VS Union Of India - 2004 8 Supreme 111, Prahlad Pradhan VS Sonu Kumhar - 2019 0 Supreme(SC) 1209, Suraj Bhan VS Financial Commr. - 2007 3 Supreme 539, Bhimabai Mahadeo Kambekar (D) Th. LR VS Arthur Import and Export Company - 2019 2 Supreme 3, AJIT KAUR @ SURJIT KAUR VS DARSHAN SINGH(DEAD) THROUGH LRS - 2019 4 Supreme 156:** These excerpts state the settled principle that mutation entries do not confer title. They are treated as established legal maxims.
* **Jagdevi, W/o Kashinath vs Deputy Commissioner Bidar - 2025 0 Supreme(Kar) 291:** Confirms the finality of judgments, aligning with the procedural consistency required by the *Jitendra Singh* line of cases.
* **T. Ravi VS B. Chinna Narasimha - 2017 3 Supreme 267:** Discusses *lis pendens* and the binding nature of preliminary decrees. While distinct from mutation law, it treats these principles as the prevailing rule of law.
* **Anand Choudhary VS State of M. P. - 2025 0 Supreme(MP) 46:** This entry discusses the framing of Mutation Rules (2018) and Registration Rules (1908). While it references the legislative context, it does not explicitly state how *Jitendra Singh* specifically interacts with these rules in a "followed" or "distinguished" manner, though it implies the rules are part of the broader legal framework.
* **Tarachandra VS Bhawarlal - 2026 1 Supreme 530:** This text notes an appeal where an appellant claims the High Court "failed to consider" *Jitendra Singh*. Because this is an allegation of judicial error in a lower court rather than an assessment of the precedent's validity, it is categorized as uncertain regarding its status as a "followed" case in that specific High Court order.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
