Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
On The Death Of Amiya Kumar Boro, His Legal Heirs Runi Boro W/O Lt. Amiya Kumar Boro – Appellant
Versus
Assam Board Of Revenue And Ors. – Respondents
WP(C) 525 of 2014
Decided on : 11-08-2023
Mutation of land - Registered Deed of Gift - Writ petition has been filed challenging order passed by learned Assam Board of Revenue whereby order of Additional Deputy Commissioner was affirmed – Authorities instead of relegating parties to Civil Court cancelled mutation and reinstated name of mother of petitioner who had already expired. Para 12.
Finding of the Court: Findings by both Authorities, in opinion of Court that dispute needs to be resolved by Civil Court taking into account that there are certain disputes as regards genuineness of Gift Deeds seems to be a reasonable conclusion arrived at by both Authorities - Court further finds it relevant to take note of that in meantime, petitioner had also filed a suit being Title Suit before Court of Civil Judge Senior Division-I which is also presently pending wherein Gift so executed in favour of respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4 has been put to challenge as well as declaration of petitioner’s right over land in question has also been sought for - Court, therefore, interferes with order passed by learned Assam Board of Revenue as well as order passed by Additional Deputy Commissioner to extent of reinstating name of mother of petitioner who had already expired.
Result: Writ petition disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 19.08.2013 passed by the learned Assam Board of Revenue in RA(K)165/2012 whereby the order of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro) in RA(M)47/2012-13 dated 03.12.2012 was affirmed.
2. From the facts narrated in the petition, it transpires that the land in question which is the plot of land measuring 3.75 Ares covered by Dag No.1946 of KP Patta No.1331 situated at village Sahar Ulubari Part-11 under Guwahati Revenue Circle in the district of Kamrup (Metro), Assam originally belonged to the mother of the petitioner.
3. It is the claim of the petitioner that the petitioner’s mother gifted the said plot of land in favour of the petitioner by a registered Deed of Gift bearing Registration No.4227/2000 dated 16.06.2000. The petitioner thereupon applied for mutation of the land as well as the houses standing thereon which were granted by the concerned Revenue Authority as well as the Guwahati Municipal Corporation.
4. Subsequent to that, it is the case of the petitioner that a purported Gift Deed was executed by the mother of the petitioner in favour of the respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4 vide the registered Deed of Gift bearing No.12597 dated 13.10.2009.
5. On the basis of the said Deed of Gift, the respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4 applied for mutation of their names in respect to the land. The said mutation was rejected by the Circle Officer, Guwahati Revenue Circle in Mutation Case No.3463/2010-11 vide an order dated 13.01.2012.
6. The respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4, thereupon, preferred an appeal before the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro) which was registered and numbered as RA(M)47/2012-13. The Additional Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro) vide an order dated 03.12.2012, without deciding as to whether the mutation granted in favour of the petitioner was in accordance with the provisions of law or the respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4 would be entitled to the mutation, cancelled the mutation in favour of the petitioner and reinstated the name of the petitioner’s mother who was already dead as on 21.12.2009.
7. Being aggrieved, the petitioner thereupon preferred an appeal before the Assam Board of Revenue which was registered and numbered as RA(K) 165/2012. The learned Assam Board of Revenue vide its judgment and order dated 19.08.2013 did not interfere with the order of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro) and observed that it is the Civil Court who can decide as regards the genuineness of the Gift Deeds, one executed in favour of the petitioner and the other executed in favour of the respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4. Be that as it may, the learned Assam Board of Revenue made certain observation which touches on the rights of the parties which could have been decided only by the Civil Court.
8. It is under such circumstances that the petitioner being aggrieved by the order passed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro) dated 03.12.2012 as well as the order dated 19.08.2013 by the learned Assam Board of Revenue had approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition.
9. It appears from the record that vide an order dated 03.02.2014, this Court had issued notice and stayed the order dated 19.08.2013 passed by the learned Assam Board of Revenue in RA(K) 165/2012 as well as the order of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro) dated 03.12.2012. It further appears from the records that there is an affidavit-in-opposition so filed by the respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4 wherein it has been mentioned that there has been various litigations in Civil Court amongst the petitioner as well as the respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4.
10. I have heard the learned counsels for the petitioner as well as the counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1. The respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4, however, are not represented.
11. This Court has duly perused the order dated 03.12.2012 passed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro) in RA(M) 47/2012-13 as well as the
Dispute needs to be resolved by Civil Court taking into account that there are certain disputes as regards genuineness of Gift Deeds seems to be a reasonable conclusion arrived at by both Authorities....
The appellate authority is required to make a reasoned decision on mutation appeals, ensuring compliance with statutory provisions.
The Assam Board of Revenue cannot exercise jurisdiction over matters that have been conclusively settled by a competent court, especially when procedural requirements like condonation of delay are no....
Mutation proceedings under the U.P. Land Revenue Act do not confer title and are subject to civil suits for declaration of rights.
Mutation proceedings under the U.P. Land Revenue Act do not confer title and are subject to the outcome of civil suits regarding property rights.
Entry in revenue records or mutation does not confer title; title must be established through a declaratory suit in a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction.
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
