An agreement to sell agricultural land without prior permission from the Collector is invalid and unenforceable under the Tenancy Act.

JUDGMENT :

Nisha M. Thakore, J.

1. The present appeal is filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as “the Code”) by the appellant-original plaintiff, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order dated 08.11.2023 passed below Exh.69 by the learned 12th Additional Senior Civil Judge & Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara in Special Civil Suit No.202 of 2010. By the aforesaid judgment and order, the learned Civil Judge has allowed the application preferred by the original defendants-respondents herein under Order VII Rule 11 (a) and (d) of the Code, thereby rejecting the plaint.

2. The material facts, which are necessary for adjudication of the present appeal as pleaded by the original plaintiff in the plaint, are reproduced hereunder:

2.1 The suit land consists of an agricultural land bearing revenue survey no.529 having block no.357 admeasuring 00 Hectatre 88 ARE’S and 02 sq. mtrs. situated at Village-Kapurai, Taluka/District-Vadodara (hereafter referred to as “the suit land”). The aforesaid suit land is a new tenure restricted tenure land and the original defendant nos.1 to 5 with condition to get convert the aforesaid suit land into an old tenure land, had executed one irrecoverable power of attorney in favour of defendant no.6 on 01.08.2006. The defendant no.6 on the basis of such authority conferred by the original owners/ defendant nos.1 to 5 had executed the disputed agreement to sell dated 22.02.2007 in favour of the plaintiff, by which, the defendants had agreed to sell the suit land in favour of the plaintiff. The sale consideration of the suit land was agreed for an amount of Rs.9,50,000/- and right from the execution of the Banakhat in various installments, the plaintiff claimed to have paid an amount of Rs.5,50,000/- and the remaining amount was agreed to be paid on conversion of the suit land from tenure to old tenure and subject to the execution of the registered sale deed. While entering into the notarized Banakhat, one of the conditions, which was incorporated was that the plaintiff had agreed to make payment of the premium amount towards such conversion of the suit land from new tenure to old tenure.

2.2 It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant nos.2 to 5 through their lawyer had served a legal notice dated 25.09.2007 by R.P.A.D upon defendant no.6, thereby declaring their intention of revoking the power of attorney dated 01.08.2006. The aforesaid defendants had also declared such intention by publishing a public notice in the Sandesh Newspaper on 04.10.2007.

2.3 It is the case of the plaintiff that thereafter the defendant no.6 through his lawyer had addressed reply dated 08.10.2007 and the same was also published in the local newspaper on 09.10.2007. By referring to the aforesaid fact, the plaintiff has contended that he became aware about the aforesaid controversy and had approached defendant nos.1 to 6. At that stage, defendant nos.2 to 5 had informed him that the proceedings for conversion of suit land from new to old tenure land has been entrusted to one Bhupendrabhai Nathabhai Patel and one Jafarbhai Mahammadbhai Qureshi of Tandalja and subsequently their power of attorney has also been revoked and assured the plaintiff not to raise any concern.

2.4 It is the case of the plaintiff that defendant nos.1 to 5, had thereafter, not responded as assured and in fact, they had issued notice seeking title clearance certificate by inviting objection on 06.03.2010 in Sandesh Newspaper, as if they intended to sell the suit land to third parties. In such circumstances, the plaintiff had raised objections through his lawyer on 09.03.2010.

2.5 By referring to the aforesaid pleadings, the plaintiff has submitted that the cause of action had therefore, arisen for the plaintiff to approach the court of learned Additional Civil Judge by filing suit for specific performance of his notarized Banakhat dated 22.02.2007 in respect of the suit land as well a