Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 3769
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J
YOGENDRASINH JAYENDRASINH JADEJA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. – Respondent
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8543 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: MR AADITYA P DAVE
For the Respondents: MR JAYNEEL PARIKH AGP
The court reinforced the principle of lis pendens, mandating registration of pending litigation to protect property interests.
Headnote:(A) Transfer of Properties Act, 1882 - Section 52 - Principles of lis pendens - The impugned order refusing to record lis pendens was quashed as illegal and unjust, necessitating proper registration as per legal requirements for the public notice of pending litigation. (Paras 1, 5)
(B) Court’s mandatory duty to act on registered documents - The Mamlatdar's refusal to record a registered document without verifying its authenticity was held incorrect, requiring compliance with statutory procedures. (Paras 4, 6)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner claims ownership of land based on a notarized sale agreement and sought recognition of lis pendens amid disputes regarding the property.
Findings of Court:
The Court validated the principle of lis pendens, emphasizing the necessity of molding recording requirements to preserve the sanctity of the legal process.
Issues: The main issue was whether the Mamlatdar was correct in rejecting the registration of lis pendens based on erroneous grounds.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reaffirmed that once a valid registered document exists, it must be entered into revenue records by the authority as per law.
Result: The Special Civil Application is allowed and disposed of.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ application principles and nature. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner's land claim and judicial backing. (Para 2) |
| 3. representation of respondents and legal acknowledgment. (Para 3) |
| 4. court affirms lis pendens legal instrument requirements. (Para 4) |
| 5. final order quashing the mamlatdar's decision. (Para 5) |
| 6. summary of court's determination and direction. (Para 6) |
ORAL ORDER
1. The present Special Civil Application has been filed praying for the following reliefs :-
“(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction for quashing and setting aside the impugned order/communication dtd.19.05.2025 bearing no.E- dhara/e-post/222110/25 passed by respondent no.3 authority (Annexure “A”) refusing to record an entry in the records of rights of the registered lis-pendense in respect of subject property as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, contrary to the settled legal position as also violative of Art. 14 of Constitution of India;
(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to direct respondent no.3 to forthwith reconsider/register lis-pendense pursuant to application dtd. 12/13.05.2025 submitted by the Petitioner in respect of subject property, pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the present petition;
(C) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to grant such other and further reliefs, as may be deemed fit by this Hon’ble Court, in the interest of justice.”
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has purchased the subject land from the owner Smt. Nirmalaben Sejpal vide notarized agreement to sale dated 02.07.2011 upon payment of total sale consideration and possession was also handed over to the petitioner, for which, the receipt is endorsed. He submits that thereafter, the objections were raised by the original land owners in mutation of revenue entry and therefore, under the circumstances, the petitioner was constrained to file Special Civil Suit No.113 of 2024 in the Civil Court at Rajkot for specific performance of the agreement to sale and has also challenged the registered sale deed executed in favour of the third party. The learned counsel submits that subsequently, the petitioner got lis-pendens of the pending Civil Suit registered with the Sub- Registrar OfÏce, Rajkot (Rural) vide registration No.3165 dated 05.05.2025 in respect of the subject land. The learned counsel submits that by the impugned order, the Mamlatdar, Rajkot has refused to record the lis-pendens in the revenue record on the ground that the petitioner has to obtain an order of the competent judicial court. He submits that the application of the petitioner has been rejected on an erroneous ground and it is also contrary to the settled legal position enunciated by this Court. In support of his contentions, the learned counsel has relied upon the following judgments :-
i. 2025 (1) GLH 204 Shardaben d/o Davalbhai Patel vs. State of Gujarat ii. Special Civil Application No.13930 of 2023 order dated 10.01.2024 Vijaybhai Mansukhbhai Gajera vs. State of Gujarat iii. Special Civil Application No.21938 of 2023 order dated 10.01.2024 Chandubhai Lalubhai Bhatti vs. State of Gujarat iv. Special Civil Application No.16318 of 2021 order dated 12.01.2023 Daxaben w/o Maheshbhai Thakor d/o Dilipbhai Popatji Thakor vs. State of Gujarat v. 2007 (2) GLR 1297 Dipakbhai Manilal Patel vs. State of Gujarat
3. The learned AGP appearing on behalf of the respondents could not dispute the settled legal position and the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. This Court, in the case of Dipakbhai Manilal Patel vs. State of Gujarat reported in 2007 (2) GLR 1297, has observed thus:
"5. If the provisions of Section 52 read with aforesaid amendment for Gujarat State are considered, the principles of lis pendens would apply to a transaction if entered after institution of Suit only, if such notice of lis pendens is registered under the Indian Registration Act, 1908 an
