Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Ravi Ranjan, Sujit Narayan Prasad, JJ.
Sitaram Sao son of Late Rambaran Sahu - Applicant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Ors. - Respondent
L.P.A. No. 268 of 2018 With I.A. No. 6375 of 2020 With I.A. No. 187 of 2020
Decided On : 18-01-2021
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Rule 34 - Order 21 - Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 - Section 16 - Purchase of property by sale deed - Registered sale deed - It was further case of writ petitioners that sale deed clearly shows to its northern adjoining which is on account of sale deed therefore there was no dispute that father of writ petitioners namely who was member of joint Hindu family was adjoining of property as contained in sale deed such writ petitioners also have status of adjoining of property covered under sale deed and accordingly writ petitioners have rightly purchased property and there was no violation of Section Bihar Land Reforms – Held, Single Judge has considered aforesaid reason to be incorrect and rightly done so as by virtue of purchase of property by sale deed vide sale deed status of adjoining cannot be disputed subsequently that too without challenging aforesaid registered sale deed further on ground by coming to conclusion by perusal sale deed it has been found that towards north property name of father of writ petitioners was mentioned aforesaid fact has not been disputed as would appear form pre-emption application field by pre-emptor and once property has been purchased by father writ petitioners towards north and writ petitioner being members of Hindu undivided family accordingly petitioner have obtained status of adjoining - So far as allegation of respondent appellant herein that these two sale deeds have been executed as a device to defeat provisions of law it cannot be said to be sustainable and argument made to that effect has also been discarded by recording reason that merely by virtue of purchase of land through two different sale deeds by two different persons and executed on same date no malice can be attributed to petitioners for that action – Appeal disposed
JUDGMENT :
With consent of the parties, hearing of the matter has been done through video conferencing and there is no complaint whatsoever regarding audio and visual quality.
2. This intra-court appeal is preferred against the order/judgment dated 23.02.2018 passed by learned Single Judge in W.P. (C) No. 7084 of 2011 with W.P. (C) No. 7102 of 2011, whereby and whereunder the writ petitions were allowed and orders dated 22.10.2011 passed in Land Ceiling Revision Case No. 33/2009 and Land Ceiling Revision Case No. 34/2009; orders dated 19.09.2009 passed in Land Ceiling Appeal No. 05/2007-08 and Land Ceiling Appeal No. 12 of 2007-08; and orders dated 12.01.2007 passed in Land Ceiling Case No. 2/2005-06 and Land Ceiling Case No. 1/2005-06 were quashed and set aside.
4. The brief facts of the case, which are required to be enumerated herein for proper adjudication of the lis, are as under:
The writ petitioners, respondents nos. 2 to 4 herein, who are members of Hindu undivided family, purchased two landed property vide registered sale deed Nos. 589 of 2005 and 590 of 2005 both dated 31.03.2005.
The respondent no. 5, namely, Sitaram Sao (appellant herein) filed pre-emption applications, being Land Ceiling Case No. 2/2005-06 and Land Ceiling Case No. 1/2005-06, on the ground that he is the adjoining raiyat on the western side of the vended plot as such the vended plot ought to be registered in his name, which were allowed vide order dated 12.01.2007 by the revenue authority-Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Latehar, against which the writ petitioners had filed appeal, being Land Ceiling Appeal No. 05/2007-08 and Land Ceiling Appeal No. 12 of 2007-08, which were dismissed vide order dated 19.09.2009 and thereafter, the writ petitioners filed revision applications, being Land Ceiling Revision Case No. 33 of 2009 and Land Ceiling Revision Case No. 34 of 2009, which were also dismissed.
Aggrieved thereof, the writ petitioners filed two writ petitions challenging orders passed by the revenue authorities, being W.P.(C) No. 7084 of 2011 and W.P.(C) No. 7102 of 2011, which were heard together and allowed vide order dated 23.02.2018.
3. In the instant intra-court appeal, the appellant (respondent no. 5 in the writ petition) has confined his prayer with respect to order passed in W.P.(C) No. 7102 of 2011 that is matter relating to sale deed no. 589 dated 31.03.2005.
The specific case of the writ petitioners before the writ Court was that by virtue of registered sale deed no. 494 dated 18.4.2001, the father of the writ petitioners, namely, Dwarika Vishwakarma purchased 20 decimals of land from the owner of the land namely, Khobhari Singh Kushwaha and Lakshman Singh Kushwaha, in Old Khata No. 38 (New Khata No. 104), Old Plot No. 79 (New Plot No. 318) with the boundary:
South : Shiv Sao and Murat Sao
East : Mahesh Singh
West : Tulsi Sao
In the year 2005, one of the boundary raiyats towards southern side of the property as contained in sale deed no. 494 dated 18.04.2001 sold out 31 decimals of land in Khata No.30 (New Khata No.109), Plot No.151 (New Plot No.315) to the writ petitioners by registered sale deed no. 589 dated 31.03.2005 with the following boundary:
South : Shiva Sao
East : Basudeo Mishra & Raj Ballabh Singh
West : Sitaram Master
It was further case of the writ petitioners that the sale deed no. 589 dated 31.03.2005 clearly shows Dwarika Vishwarkarma to its northern adjoining raiyat, which is on account of sale deed no. 494 dated 18.04.2001, therefore, there was no dispute that the father of the writ petitioners namely, Dwarika Vishwarkarma, who was the member of the joint Hindu family, was the adjoining raiyat of the property as contained in sale deed no. 589 dated 31.03.2005, as such the writ petitioners also have the status of the adjoining raiyat of the property covered under sale deed no. 589 dated 31.03.2005 and accordingly, the writ petitioners have rightly purchased the property and there was no violatio
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
