Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 16797
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Vaibhavi D. Nanavati, J
ADITYA DIPAK SHAH @ DISIHIT DIPAK SHAHV/sSTATE OF GUJARAT
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2480 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: NM Kapadia, Vasvi N Kapadia
For the Respondents: Dhaval Trivedi
A registered notice of lis pendens under the Transfer of Property Act and Indian Registration Act must be mutated in the revenue records by the concerned authorities to provide public notice of pending litigation and protect the integrity of the suit.
Headnote:The petitioner invoked Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging an order dated 22.10.2024, whereby the respondent refused to mutate a registered notice of lis-pendens (serial no. 5992 of 2024) in the revenue records of Village Kochrab, relying on a government circular dated 30.05.2022. The court found that the refusal to record the mutation was contrary to established legal positions. The primary issue was whether a registered notice of lis-pendens must be entered into revenue records. The court reasoned that under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act and the Indian Registration Act, 1908, the purpose of registering such notice is to ensure that any person conducting a title search is put on notice of the pending litigation, thereby preventing the suit from being frustrated. Consequently, once a document is registered, the revenue authorities are required to mutate the entry after following the prescribed procedure under the Gujarat Land Revenue Code. With the aforesaid directions, the present Petition stands allowed to the aforesaid extent, keeping open all the rights and contentions that may be taken in the suit proceedings by the respective parties.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge against the refusal of revenue authorities to mutate a registered lis pendens entry. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. reliance on judicial precedents to establish the necessity of recording lis pendens in revenue records. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. registered lis pendens notices serve as public notice and must be mutated in revenue records to prevent frustration of suits. (Para 6) |
| 4. quashing of the order refusing mutation and directing the authority to record the lis pendens entry. (Para 7 , 8) |
ORAL ORDER
1. Issue Rule, returnable forthwith. Mr. Dhaval Trivedi, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent – State authorities.
2. Heard Mr. N.M. Kapadia, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Dhaval Trivedi, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent – State authorities.
3. By way of the present petition, the petitioner is constrained to invoke Article 226 of the Constitution of India, wherein, by the impugned communication/order dated 22.10.2024, the respondent no.2 declined to mutate the entry of lis-pendense registered at serial no.5992 of 2024 before the Sub-Registrar, SRO – Ahmedabad – 4, Paldi, in the revenue record of Village: Kochrab, Tal. Paldi, Dist.: Ahmedabad (Annexure-C), mainly relying on the circular dated 30.05.2022 bearing No. HKP/102022/916/J/Sachivalay/Gandhinagar, which provides that for the provision of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code in the revenue record, concerned Judicial Court can pass appropriate order for recording the lis-pendense in an entry.
4. Mr. N.M. Kapadia, learned advocate, relies on the order passed in SCA No. 5244 of 2025 dated 10.02.2026 and submits that the aforesaid issue is no longer res-integra, wherein, the Hon’ble Court from time to time had directed to record the mutation of the entry of lis-pendense.
5. Mr. Dhaval Trivedi, learned AGP is not in a position to controvert the aforesaid submissions made by Mr. N.M. Kapadia, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner.
6. The present petition is governed by the position of law as laid down in the case of Dipakbhai Manilal Patel & Anr. v/s. State of Gujarat & Anr. reported in 2007 (2) GLR 1297 and order dated 14.02.2023 passed in SCA No. 1877 of 2023 and the order dated 10.02.2026 passed in SCA No. 5244 of 2025 . At this stage, it is apposite to refer to the order dated 14.02.2023 passed in SCA No. 1877 of 2023 , wherein, the aforesaid ratio laid down in Dipakhai (supra) has also referred in the said order. Para-7 of the order dated 14.02.2203, reads thus:
“7. As noted hereinabove, this Court in identical case, in the case of Dipakbhai Manilal Patel and Anr. (supra) 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 and as per the provisions of the amendment, the notice of pendency of the suit should contain the details as per subsection 2 of the amendment in Section 52, which is applicable to the Gujarat State. The essential purpose of the aforesaid amendment is to see that any person who may be interested to purchase the property when undertakes the title search of the property with the sub-registrar, the person concerned would be put to notice that a particular suit is pending before the competent Court and therefore, he may not be misguided or if with conscious knowledge, the person concerned has purchased the property, the purchaser may not be in a position to contend that he was not aware about the pendency of the litigation and consequently, the Suit may not be frustrated or the principles of lis pendens can have its full effect as per the provisions of Transfer of Properties Act.
6. Therefore, it appears that the stand of the Mamlatdar that such docume
