Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 16813
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Vaibhavi D. Nanavati, J
RAMESHBHAI BHANABHAI BHAGATV/sSTATE OF GUJARAT
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6547 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: NV Gandhi
For the Respondents: Jwalant Vora
Once a notice of lis pendens is registered under the Indian Registration Act, 1908, in accordance with Section 52 of the Transfer of Properties Act, the revenue authorities are obligated to mutate such entry in the revenue records after following the prescribed legal procedure.
Headnote:The petitioners invoked Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging an order dated 24.02.2026, whereby the respondent declined to mutate a registered notice of lis-pendens in the revenue records of Village Vesu, Surat, relying on a government circular dated 30.05.2022. The court found that the refusal to record the registered notice was contrary to established legal positions. The primary issue was whether revenue authorities are obligated to record a registered notice of lis-pendens in the revenue records. The court reasoned that under Section 52 of the Transfer of Properties Act, read with 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 pending litigation. Consequently, once a registered document exists, the revenue authorities must enter it into the records after following the procedure prescribed under the Bombay Land Revenue Code or Gujarat Land Revenue Rules. The impugned order passed by the respondent no.3 dated 24.02.2026 is required to be quashed and set aside and hereby quashed and set aside.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition challenging the refusal of revenue authorities to mutate a registered notice of lis pendens. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. reliance on judicial precedents to establish that mutation of registered lis pendens is a settled legal issue. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. registered notices of lis pendens must be recorded in revenue records to ensure public notice and protect property transactions. (Para 6) |
| 4. quashing of the administrative order and direction to mutate the registered lis pendens entry. (Para 7 , 8) |
ORAL ORDER
1. Issue Rule, returnable forthwith. Mr. Jwalant Vora, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent – State authorities.
2. Heard Mr. N.V. Gandhi, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Jwalant Vora learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent – State authorities.
3. By way of the present petition, the petitioners are constrained to invoke Article-226 of the Constitution of India, wherein, by the impugned communication / order dated 24.02.2026, the respondent no.3 declined to mutate the entry of lis-pendense registered at serial no. 12767 of 2011 before the Sub-Registrar, Athwa, Surat in the revenue record of Village: Vesu, Tal.: Choryasi, Dist.: Surat (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. Gandhi, learned advocate, relies on the order passed in SCA No. 1877 of 2023 dated 14.02.2023 and submits that the aforesaid issue is no longer res-integra, wherein, the Court from time to time had directed to record the mutation of the entry of lis-pendense.
5. Mr. Jwalant Vora, learned AGP is not in a position to controvert the aforesaid submissions made by Mr. N.V. Gandhi, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners.
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 . 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 documents is not as per the provisions of the Transfer of the Properties Act is not corre
