Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 9092
1 M.P.No.4812/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA ON THE 4th OF MARCH, 2024 MISC. PETITION No. 4812 of 2022 BETWEEN:- HIMANSHU SHRIVASTAVA S/O SHRI A.K. SHRIVASTAVA OCCUPATION: ARCHITECT R/O 1629 KHANU GAON BHOPAL DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH) .....PETITIONER (BY SHRI NISHANT AGRAWAL - ADVOCATE ) AND 1. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER BHOPAL DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH) 2. DR. A. K. SHRIVASTAVA S/O SHRI BADRINATAYAN SHRIVASTAVA R/O B-95/SPM NAGAR VIDISHA DISTRICT VIDISHA (MADHYA PRADESH) 3. VIKAS SHRIVASTAVA S/O SHRI BADRINARAYAN SHRIVASTAVA R/O B-95/SPM NAGAR VIDISHA DISTRICT VIDISHA (MADHYA PRADESH) 4. 4.A. HARHAINESS MEHARTAJ SHAZIDA SULTAN BEGUM (SINCE DEAD) THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS NAWAB MANSOOR ALI KHAN PATAUDI (SINCE DEAD) THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS SMT. SHARMILA TAIGORE W/O LATE NAWAB MANSOOR ALI KHAN PATAUDI B-2 / IV BASANT VIHAR NEW DELHI (DELHI) 2 M.P.No.4812/2022 4.B. SHOHA ALI KHAN D/O LATE NAWAB MANSOOR ALI KHAN PATAUDI B-2 / IV BASANT VIHAR NEW DELHI (DELHI) 4.C. SHOBA ALI D/O LATE NAWAB MANSOOR ALI KHAN B-2 / IV BASANT VIHAR NEW DELHI (DELHI) 4.D. SAIF ALIK KHAN S/O LATE NAWAB MANSOOR ALI KHAN PATAUDI B-2 / IV BASANT VIHAR NEW DELHI (DELHI) 5. GENERAL PUBLIC NOT MENTION (MADHYA PRADESH) .....RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.SWATI ASEEM GEORGE – DEPUTY GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) ……………………………………………………………………………………… This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:
,Advocate General
The central legal point established is that an unregistered gift deed does not transfer title, and mutation based on a will is beyond the jurisdiction of revenue authorities.
Headnote:
Registration Act - Transfer of Title - Mutation of Name - Unregistered Gift Deed
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a petition for mutation of his name based on an unregistered gift deed and subsequent transactions. The authorities rejected the application, stating that the unregistered gift deed did not transfer any title.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the unregistered gift deed did not transfer any title to the petitioner's predecessors, and therefore, the subsequent transactions did not confer valid title. The court held that the mutation of name based on the will was beyond the jurisdiction of the revenue authorities.
Issues: Validity of mutation application based on unregistered gift deed, jurisdiction of revenue authorities in mutation based on will
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Registration Act, which mandates the registration of an instrument of gift for the transfer of title. It also emphasized that a seller cannot transfer a title better than what they themselves have.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition, affirming the rejection of the application for mutation of the petitioner's name.
O R D E R
This petition under article 227 of constitution of India has been filed against the order dated 26.8.2022 and 4.7.2022 passed by Additional Commissioner, Bhopal in Appeal No.1150/Appeal/2021-
22 and Review Application No.8/Review/2022-23.
2. According to the petitioner, Her Highness Nawab Sazida Sultan Begum, who was the ruler of Bhopal, was recorded as owner in the revenue records. She executed an unregistered gift deed in favour of Basantilal and Balram. Basantilal and Balram in their turn executed a sale deed in favour of Shri Badri Narayan Shrivastava, the grandfather of the petitioner. Shri Badri Narayan Shrivastava expired on 19.6.2002. Thereafter, his widow i.e. grand-mother of the petitioner namely Smt. Prakashwati Shrivastava executed a registered will in favour of the petitioner on 19.08.2003. Smt.Prakashwati Shrivastava expired on 24.01.2005. Thereafter, the petitioner moved an application on 12.04.2021 for mutation of his name on the basis of will. The said application was rejected by Tahsildar, Sant Hirdaram Nagar, Nazul, Bairagarh, Circle Bhopal on 27.08.2021 in Case No.76/A-6/2021-22. One of the grounds for rejection of the said application was that the petitioner had not clarified that how Basantilal and Balram, who had alienated the property to Shri Badri Narayan Shrivastava, got the title.
3. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before SDO, Sant Hirdaram Nagar, Nazul, Bairagarh, Circle Bhopal. The said appeal was registered as Case No.61/Appeal/2021- 22 and the same has been dismissed by SDO by order dated 07.01.2022 on the ground that the gift deed was mandatorily registrable and no title would pass on to Basantilal and Balram on the basis of unregistered gift deed. Since Basantilal and Balram had no title therefore they cannot alienate any title better than what they were having. Under these circumstances it was held that the name of the petitioner is not liable to be mutated and accordingly the appeal was dismissed.
4. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Additional Commissioner, Bhopal Division, Bhopal, which was dismissed by order dated 04.07.2022 in Case No.1150/Appeal/2021-2022. The review filed by the petitioner, which was registered as Case No.8/review/22-23 has also been dismissed by the Additional Commissioner, Bhopal Division, Bhopal by order dated 26.08.2022.
5. Challenging the orders passed by the authorities below, it a submitted by counsel for petitioner that although an unregistered gift deed was executed by Nawab Sazida Sultan Begum, who was the ruler of Bhopal, but no objection has been raised by anybody. Therefore, the title was validly transferred to Basantilal and Balram and under these circumstances it is submitted that the sale deed executed by Basantilal and Balram in favour of his grandfather Badri Narayan Shrivtastava was valid and by virtue of registered sale deed, his grandfather became the owner of the land in dispute.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
7. Section 17 of Registration Act provides that registration of instrument of gift of immovable property is compulsory. Thus, it is clear that by unregistered gift deed, no right or title stood transferred in favour of Basantilal and Balram (this finding has been given without affirming as to whether any gift deed was ever executed by Nawab Sazida Sultan Begum in favour of Basantilal and Balram or not?)
8. It is well established principal of law that a seller cannot transfer a title better than what he himself has. Since Basantilal and Balram did not get any title by virtue of an unregistered gift deed, therefore, even if they had executed a registered sale deed in favour of Badri Narayan Shrivastava, still no title can be said to have passed on to Badri Narayan Shrivastava for the simple reason that his sellers did not have any title in the said property.
9. It is well established principle of law that even if no objection is raised by the pa
