Back
2017 Supreme(Guj) 540
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Abhilasha Kumari, J.
Misrimal Asharam and Ors. – Appellants
Vs.
State of Gujarat and Ors. – Respondents
Special Civil Application Nos. 11060 and 13024 of 2015
Decided On : 10-03-2017
For the Appellant :Mehul S. Shah, Senior Advocate and Hitesh N. Acharya, Advocate
For the Respondent: Vishrut Jani, Assistant Government Pleader
Headnote:
Constitution of India Articles 226 and 227 -Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879 -Section 135D -Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act -Section 76A -Petitions have been clubbed together and common arguments have been addressed by learned counsel for the respective parties. For the sake of convenience, facts are taken and reference to parties is made, from Special Civil Application No. 11060 of 2015. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to these petitions are that land bearing revenue Survey No. 1207/2 situated at Village, originally belonged. Before his demise, executed a Will, bequeathing the land in question to (whose heirs are impleaded as respondents Nos. 5/1 to 5/5 in Special Civil Application No. 11060/2015 and respondents Nos. 11/1 to 11/5 in Special Civil Application No. 13024/2015) and (whose heirs are respondents Nos. 4/1 to 4/5 in Special Civil Application No. 11060/2015 and are the petitioners in Special Civil Application No. 13024/2015). passed away on and upon his death, Revenue Entry No. 2690 came to be mutated in the name of which was certified after following the due procedure of the issuance of notices under section 135D of the then Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879 ("the Code"), conducting an inquiry and recording the statement of the heirs and legal representatives of the testator and drawing up a Panchnama by the Deputy Mamlatdar (Revenue). Deputy Collector and Prant Officer (Land Reforms), Viramgam, in exercise of suo motu power initiated revision proceedings being RTS Case No. 30/1990. As a result, Revenue Entry No. 2690 came to be set aside. Aggrieved thereby filed a revision application No. 93/1991 before the Collector, which came to be dismissed the predecessors of the petitioners of Special Civil Application No. 11060/2015 purchased land bearing Block No. 356, 357, 358 and 359 of Village (respondents Nos. 6 to 12 in Special Civil Application No. 11060/2015, hereinafter referred to as Vendors) by executing two different registered Sale Deeds dated 03.06.1987. Revenue Entry No. 1036 was mutated in respect of the said sale transaction and certified on 11.08.1987, with the endorsement that "the purchasers are agriculturists of Village Ognaj and the land purchased in Village is situated within a periphery of eight kilometers. Similarly, Revenue Entry No. 10377 also came to be mutated for the second Sale Deed and certified on 11.08.1987 with a similar endorsement -Held It can exercise revisional jurisdiction on the limited grounds mentioned in the above provision if it finds the order of the Collector to be contrary to law, where the Collector had failed to determine a material issue of law or where there is a substantial procedural defect. The order under challenge before the GRT was an order of remand to which none of the above contingencies were applicable as it was not a final order of determination. The GRT definitely has the power to set aside the order but not to go beyond the order and give a final conclusion to issues on which no final opinion has been pronounced by the Deputy Collector. The concept of "substantial justice" does not occur in Section 76 of the Tenancy Act and cannot be pleaded on the part of the Vendors to enlarge the scope of the jurisdiction of the GRT, beyond what is conferred upon it by the statute. The submission on behalf of the Vendors, therefore fails. In conclusion, this Court is of the view that examined from all angles, on the touchstone of settled principles of law, the petitions deserve to succeed. Accordingly, the petitions are allowed. The impugned judgment of the GRT dated 10.02.2015 in Revision Application No. TEN/BA/177/2009 (under challenge in each case) and the order dated 24.03.2009 of the Deputy Collector (Land Reforms), in Revision Application No. 132/2005 with Appeal No. 64/2006 (under challenge in Special Civil Application No. 11060/2015), are set aside. Rule is made absolute in each petition. Parties to bear their own costs -Petition is Allowed
Abhilasha Kumari, J.
1. Rule. Learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents waive service of notice of Rule on their behalf. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and with the consent of learned counsel for the respective parties, the petitions are being heard and decided finally.
2. Both these petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India have been preferred against the judgment and order dated 10.02.2015, passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal ("the GRT" for short) in Revision Application No. TEN/BA/177/09. In Special Civil Application No. 11060/2015, the order dated 24.03.2009, passed by the Deputy Collector (Land Reforms), Gandhinagar, in Revision Application No. 132/2005 with Appeal No. 64/2006, is also under challenge.
3. As common and inter-connected issues of fact and law are involved in the petitions and the parties are common, the petitions have been clubbed together and common arguments have been addressed by learned counsel for the respective parties.
4. For the sake of convenience, facts are taken and reference to parties is made, from Special Civil Application No. 11060 of 2015.
5. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to these petitions are that land bearing revenue Survey No. 1207/2 situated at Village Ognaj, Taluka Daskroi, District Ahmedabad, originally belonged to Dishaji Jusaji Thakore. Before his demise, the said Dishaji Jusaji Thakore executed a Will dated 05.08.1983, bequeathing the land in question to Ramdayalchandra Hardayalchandra (whose heirs are impleaded as respondents Nos. 5/1 to 5/5 in Special Civil Application No. 11060/2015 and respondents Nos. 11/1 to 11/5 in Special Civil Application No. 13024/2015) and Bhanvarlal Champaklal (whose heirs are respondents Nos. 4/1 to 4/5 in Special Civil Application No. 11060/2015 and are the petitioners in Special Civil Application No. 13024/2015). Dishaji Jusaji Thakore passed away on 06.10.1984 and upon his death, Revenue Entry No. 2690 came to be mutated in the name of Ramdayalchandra Hardayalchandra and Bhanvarlal Champaklal, which was certified on 28.10.1986 after following the due procedure of the issuance of notices under section 135D of the then Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879 ("the Code"), conducting an inquiry and recording the statement of the heirs and legal representatives of the testator and drawing up a Panchnama by the Deputy Mamlatdar (Revenue).
6. The Deputy Collector and Prant Officer (Land Reforms), Viramgam, in exercise of suo motu power under Section 76A of the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 ("the Tenancy Act"), initiated revision proceedings being RTS Case No. 30/1990. As a result, Revenue Entry No. 2690 dated 28.10.1986 came to be set aside. Aggrieved thereby, Ramdalaychandra Hardayalchandra and Bhanvarlal Champaklal filed a revision application No. 93/1991 before the Collector, which came to be dismissed on 30.10.1991.
7. Another parcel of land bearing revenue Survey No. 417/1 situated at Village Ognaj, Taluka Dascroi, was owned by Muljibhai Mohanbhai, who executed a Will dated 04.02.1986 in favour of Misrimal Asharam and Sheshmal Dhulaji (whose heirs are the petitioners in Special Civil Application No. 11060/2015 and respondents Nos. 10/1 to 10/6 and 12/1 to 12/4 in Special Civil Application No. 13024/2015). Muljibhai Mohanbhai passed away on 10.07.1986 and Entry No. 2718 dated 12.02.1987 came to be mutated in the revenue record in the names of Misrimal Asharam and Sheshmal Dhulaji, after following the due procedure.
8. Misrimal Asharam and Sheshmal Dhulaji, the predecessors of the petitioners of Special Civil Application No. 11060/2015 purchased land bearing Block No. 356, 357, 358 and 359 of Village Jaspur, Taluka Kalol, District Gandhinagar, from Gopaldas Vithaldas Patel and Vithaldas Ranchhoddas Patel (respondents Nos. 6 to 12 in Special Civil Application No. 11060/2015, hereinafter referred to as Vendors) by executing two different registered Sale Deeds dated 03.06.198
