http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 1 of 11

CASE NO.:

Appeal (civil) 4420 of 2004

PETITIONER:

Ramanlal Bhailal Patel & Ors

RESPONDENT:

State of Gujarat

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05/02/2008

BENCH:

R V Raveendran & Lokeshwar Singh Panta

JUDGMENT:

J U D G M E N T

CIVIL APPEAL NO.4420 OF 2004

R.V.RAVEENDRAN, J.

This appeal by special leave, against the judgment dated 4.3.2003

passed by the Gujarat High Court in L.P.A. No.123 of 2000, relates to the

interpretation of the word ’person’ in the Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling

Act, 1960 (’Ceiling Act’ for short).

The Facts :

2. The five appellants along with their respective spouses purchased 172

acres and 36 guntas of agricultural land in Madheli village under four sale

deeds dated 14.11.1970 (128A, 26G), 29.4.1971 (26A, 37G), 23.6.1971

(10A, 14G) and 18.12.1971 (6A, 39G) for a total consideration of

Rs.46,300/-. Before such purchase, the ten purchasers entered into an

agreement dated 15.9.1969 proposing to purchase about 175 acres of land in

their joint names and recording the conditions subject to which they

proposed to purchase such land. The reason stated in the agreement for the

joint purchase, was to avoid each of them having to individually negotiate

and enter into separate agreements with several owners of the lands. They

agreed that one of them would be authorized to hold negotiations and go

through the procedural requirements for the purchase; and that after

purchasing the land in their names, they would divide the lands equally as

early as possible. They also agreed that there will be no collective or joint

cultivation of the lands proposed to be purchased by them.

3. After the purchase of the lands, the ten purchasers entered into another

agreement on 30.12.1971 recording that the total sale price of Rs.46,300/-

was paid equally by all of them. The said agreement also recorded the

division of 172A, 36G of land purchased by them into ten portions among

them. Under the said agreement, they also agreed to get their names

registered in the Land Revenue Records as per the division. Subsequently,

on their applications, Mutation Entry No.1371 dated 25.2.1976 (duly

verified and approved on 19.4.1976) was made showing each co-owner as

the separate owner of the lands respectively allotted to him/her, vide Hak

Patrak (Village Form No.6), issued by the Land Revenue authorities.

The Proceedings :

4. The Mamlatdar issued a notice dated 5.11.1976 under section 20 of

the Ceiling Act to the co-owners seeking particulars of the lands held by

them, to determine whether they held any surplus land. After considering

their statements, he passed an order dated 30.4.1983. He held that the total

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 2 of 11

land held by them was 182 A. 23 Guntas; that when the lands were

converted into ’C’ Class category, the extent was 181A, 31G; that each

couple (husband and wife) were together entitled to one unit (36 acres of ’C’

category land); and that therefore the five couples (the five appellants with

their spouses) were entitled to hold five units, that is, 180 acres.

Consequently, he made a declaration under section 21 of the Ceiling Act,

that the surplus holding was 1 acre, 31 guntas and that such surplus land (in

Sy. No.643/43 in Madheli) shall vest in the Government.

5. The Deputy Collector, Dabhoi, in exercise of suo motu power of

revision under section 37 of the Ceiling Act, issued a show cause notice

dated 3.5.1984 to the appellants, being of the view that the determination of

surplus land by the Mamlatdar was contrary to the provisions of the Ceiling

Act. After hearing, he passed an order dated 23.8.1984 holding that a group

of persons or association of persons purchasing agricultural land together,

had to be treated as ’a person’ under the Act and therefore they could jointly

hold only one unit (36 Acres) in view of the provision of section 6(1) of the

Ceiling