Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Patta issued in violation of legal procedures or without jurisdiction — such as those obtained through fraudulent means, transgressing jurisdiction, or based on illegal acts — are considered void ab initio and non-est from the outset ["MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORS - Rajasthan (2016)"], ["MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORS - Rajasthan (2016)"], ["DAKE BAGARTI VS MUKUNDA KHAMARI - Orissa"], ["Badshah Barela (Deleted) Through LRs VS State of M. P. - Madhya Pradesh"], ["Savina Park Resorts and Tours Pvt. Ltd. VS State of M. P. - Madhya Pradesh"].
Orders or deeds that are void ab initio are not merely voidable but are treated as non-existent (non est) and can be challenged at any time, without any prescribed time limit ["MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORS - Rajasthan (2016)"], ["Santosh Kumar Thati vs Guda Rama Rao - Telangana"], ["Santosh Kumar Thati vs Guda Rama Rao - Telangana"], ["B. Jayachandran VS Vasanthamani - Madras"], ["B. Jayachandran VS Vasanthamani - Madras"], ["MAHENDRABHAI VASUDEV RAJGOR VS STATE OF GUJARAT - Gujarat"], ["MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORS - Rajasthan (2016)"], ["Satyanarayan vs State of Madhya Pradesh - Madhya Pradesh"], ["Jhumar Ram s/o Bhoora Ram VS Additional Distt. Collector (Second) - Rajasthan"], ["K. Lakshmi vs M. Palanisamy - Madras"], ["Sarupa VS Panchayati Akhara - Punjab and Haryana"], ["DAKE BAGARTI VS MUKUNDA KHAMARI - Orissa"], ["MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORS - Rajasthan (2016)"].
The law explicitly recognizes that no limitation period applies to the challenge or revocation of void ab initio acts, orders, or pattas, allowing such challenges at any time ["MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORS - Rajasthan (2016)"], ["Santosh Kumar Thati vs Guda Rama Rao - Telangana"], ["Santosh Kumar Thati vs Guda Rama Rao - Telangana"], ["B. Jayachandran VS Vasanthamani - Madras"], ["B. Jayachandran VS Vasanthamani - Madras"], ["MAHENDRABHAI VASUDEV RAJGOR VS STATE OF GUJARAT - Gujarat"], ["MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORS - Rajasthan (2016)"], ["Satyanarayan vs State of Madhya Pradesh - Madhya Pradesh"], ["Jhumar Ram s/o Bhoora Ram VS Additional Distt. Collector (Second) - Rajasthan"], ["K. Lakshmi vs M. Palanisamy - Madras"], ["Sarupa VS Panchayati Akhara - Punjab and Haryana"], ["DAKE BAGARTI VS MUKUNDA KHAMARI - Orissa"], ["MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORS - Rajasthan (2016)"].
Courts have consistently held that acts obtained by fraud, illegal orders, or without jurisdiction are void ab initio and can be challenged anytime, as they are not protected by statutes of limitation ["MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORS - Rajasthan (2016)"], ["MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORS - Rajasthan (2016)"], ["DAKE BAGARTI VS MUKUNDA KHAMARI - Orissa"], ["Badshah Barela (Deleted) Through LRs VS State of M. P. - Madhya Pradesh"], ["Savina Park Resorts and Tours Pvt. Ltd. VS State of M. P. - Madhya Pradesh"].
Conversely, acts that are merely irregular or defective (but not void ab initio) may be subject to limitation periods, typically three or two years, and require timely challenge ["Santosh Kumar Thati vs Guda Rama Rao - Telangana"], ["Santosh Kumar Thati vs Guda Rama Rao - Telangana"], ["B. Jayachandran VS Vasanthamani - Madras"], ["Jhumar Ram s/o Bhoora Ram VS Additional Distt. Collector (Second) - Rajasthan"], ["K. Lakshmi vs M. Palanisamy - Madras"], ["Sarupa VS Panchayati Akhara - Punjab and Haryana"], ["DAKE BAGARTI VS MUKUNDA KHAMARI - Orissa"], ["MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORS - Rajasthan (2016)"].
Analysis and Conclusion:The core principle derived from the cited cases is that void ab initio acts—such as pattas or orders obtained through fraud, exceeding jurisdiction, or illegal acts—are considered non-existent from the outset and can be challenged at any time, with no limitation period. This legal stance ensures that illegal or fraudulent acts do not gain legitimacy over time, maintaining the integrity of land and property laws. Regular acts or defective acts, however, are subject to limitation periods and require prompt challenge.
In the complex world of Indian land revenue laws, landowners often face disputes over patta—official land title deeds or grants issued by revenue authorities or panchayats. A common question arises: Patta which is illegal and void ab initio can be challenged at any time by way of revision and no time limitation is applied? The answer, backed by judicial precedents, is generally yes. This blog post delves into the legal principles, key judgments, and practical implications, helping you understand when and how such challenges can succeed.
Note: This is general information based on case law and not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
A patta is a document conferring legal rights to land, often issued under state-specific revenue codes or Panchayati Raj Acts. However, if issued illegally—such as on public land, without jurisdiction, or against public policy—it may be void ab initio, meaning 'void from the beginning.' Such acts are treated as non-est (non-existent) in law.
The core principle is that void ab initio orders lack legal effect from inception and aren't protected by limitation periods. Unlike voidable orders, which require timely challenges, these can be contested at any time via revision petitions or writs. This stems from public policy to prevent perpetuation of illegality. MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORS - Rajasthan (2016)
Courts have consistently held that a patta declared illegal and void ab initio can be challenged through a revision petition without any time bar. As affirmed in key rulings:
orders or the orders are void ab initio being against the public policy or otherwise. ... will be treated as void ab initio and for that purpose the power of revision can be invoked at any point of time MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORS - Rajasthan (2016)
This Full Bench decision emphasizes that revision powers under relevant acts (e.g., land revenue or Panchayati Raj laws) remain available indefinitely for such nullities. Similarly, the Supreme Court in Kalikakumarsinhji Lagdhirji & Ors. vs. Saurashtra State noted that while final orders may bind if appealed timely, void ab initio ones escape limitation:
The order passed by the Settlement Officer directing to issue patta in the name of the petitioner has become final as there was no appeal preferred within the period of limitation contemplated under section 45 of the Act. Santosh Kumari VS Additional Commissioner Chitrakoot Dham Division Banda - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 1356
The context clarifies: if void ab initio, no such bar applies. MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORS
Multiple High Court and Supreme Court judgments reinforce this:
In **Surendra Kumar VS State of U. P. and Others - 2012 Supreme(All) 3202
initial grant of patta in his favour is without jurisdiction/ void ab initio as he is not eligible... amounts to be outcome of fraud.
Fraudulent or ineligible grants are void, allowing later cancellation. Courts reject delay defenses for true nullities. Radha Kishan VS State - 2015 Supreme(Raj) 1765
Even after decades, challenges succeed if the patta encroaches public utility land:
The order of regularisation is void ab initio, being without jurisdiction and can be set aside at any point of time, regardless of delay. Radha Kishan VS State - 2015 Supreme(Raj) 1765
In a Maharashtra case under the Prevention of Fragmentation Act, while delay was fatal for procedural lapses, void acts weren't validated by time. Shahaji Nivrutti Gaikwad VS Shripati Rangrao Chavan (since Deceased) - 2020 Supreme(Bom) 631
Not all illegal pattas qualify. Key distinctions:- Void ab initio: No jurisdiction, public policy violation, fraud, or on prohibited land (e.g., public ways, ponds). Challenge anytime. MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORS- Voidable: Irregular but with jurisdiction; must challenge within limitation (e.g., 90 days for appeals).
Exceptions include laches in non-jurisdictional matters or where possession creates equity, but pure nullities prevail:
even power under Section 9 of the Act is required to be exercised within reasonable time. However... the impugned act cannot be validated only on the ground of lapse of considerable time. Shahaji Nivrutti Gaikwad VS Shripati Rangrao Chavan (since Deceased) - 2020 Supreme(Bom) 631
In **Ram Kumar Dhaka VS State of Rajasthan - 2013 Supreme(Raj) 47
action of the Gram Panchayat for issuance of patta... which forms part of the public way, is void ab initio and a void and nonest action.
Public way pattas remain challengeable despite delays. BHANJI DEVSHIBHAI LUHAR VS STATE OF GUJARAT - 2011 Supreme(Guj) 315
In one case, a 24-year delay failed because the allotment was valid, but void ones wouldn't. Radha Kishan VS State - 2015 Supreme(Raj) 1765
| Principle | Implication ||-----------|-------------|| Void ab initio patta | Challenge via revision anytime MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORS - Rajasthan (2016) || No limitation | Unlike appeals or voidable orders Santosh Kumari VS Additional Commissioner Chitrakoot Dham Division Banda - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 1356 || Judicial support | Full Bench, Supreme Court precedents Shahaji Nivrutti Gaikwad VS Shripati Rangrao Chavan (since Deceased) - 2020 Supreme(Bom) 631 || Exceptions | Laches for non-nullities only |
Land law prioritizes rectifying fundamental illegality. A patta illegal and void ab initio—due to lack of jurisdiction, fraud, or public policy breach—can typically be challenged at any time without limitation via revision. Supported by rulings like MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORS - Rajasthan (2016), Santosh Kumari VS Additional Commissioner Chitrakoot Dham Division Banda - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 1356, and others, this ensures public interest trumps stale claims.
Stay vigilant with land documents. For personalized guidance, reach out to a land law expert. Share your thoughts below—have you faced a patta dispute?
References: Santosh Kumari VS Additional Commissioner Chitrakoot Dham Division Banda - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 1356MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORS - Rajasthan (2016)Edukanti Kistamma (Dead) Thr. Lrs. VS S. Venkatareddy (Dead) Thr. Lrs. - 2009 8 Supreme 556MADAN GIRI and ORS vs DHAN RAJ and ORSSHIVJI RAM AND ANR vs HEERA RAM AND ORSSurendra Kumar VS State of U. P. and Others - 2012 Supreme(All) 3202Shahaji Nivrutti Gaikwad VS Shripati Rangrao Chavan (since Deceased) - 2020 Supreme(Bom) 631Radha Kishan VS State - 2015 Supreme(Raj) 1765Ram Kumar Dhaka VS State of Rajasthan - 2013 Supreme(Raj) 47BHANJI DEVSHIBHAI LUHAR VS STATE OF GUJARAT - 2011 Supreme(Guj) 315
#VoidAbInitio #PattaChallenge #LandLawIndia
orders or the orders are void ab initio being against the public policy or otherwise. ... will be treated as void ab initio and for that purpose the power of revision can be invoked at any point of time as has been held by the Full Bench ... under the garb of the said patta. ... and the Gram Panchayat has issued patta for a land which is recorded as public way in the p style="position:absolute;white-space:pre;margin
initio. ... The contention of the learned counsel for the respondent is that on one hand, the suit cannot be rejected on the ground of limitation as the main document i.e. AGPA is a document which is void ab initio and therefore, its declaration need not be sought as null and void. ... Therefore, only when the validity and enforceability of AGPA is decided, the rival contention of respondent can be determined i.e. in case, the AGPA is a document which is void ab initio#HL_END....
initio. ... The contention of the learned counsel for the respondent is that on one hand, the suit cannot be rejected on the ground of limitation as the main document i.e. AGPA is a document which is void ab initio and therefore, its declaration need not be sought as null and void. ... Therefore, only when the validity and enforceability of AGPA is decided, the rival contention of respondent can be determined i.e. in case, the AGPA is a document which is void ab initio#HL_END....
ab initio, illegal and not binding on them. ... They have also pleaded for declaration that the proceedings of the Settlement Tahsildar, Gobichettipalayam made on 10.8.1968 is non est, void ab initio, illegal and not binding on them. Thereafter, the present proceedings in C.M.A.No.24 of 2009 under the Act were initiated by respondents 1 to 6. ... Pursuant to such a direction, it is found that respondents 1 to 5 have filed a suit in O.S.No.354 of 2009 praying for declaration of title, permanent injunctio....
ab initio, illegal and not binding on them. ... They have also pleaded for declaration that the proceedings of the Settlement Tahsildar, Gobichettipalayam made on 10.8.1968 is non est, void ab initio, illegal and not binding on them. Thereafter, the present proceedings in C.M.A.No.24 of 2009 under the Act were initiated by respondents 1 to 6. ... Pursuant to such a direction, it is found that respondents 1 to 5 have filed a suit in O.S.No.354 of 2009 praying for declaration of title, permanent injunctio....
... ( 4 ) THE aforesaid orders at Annexures "c" and "d" passed by the Assistant Collector and Collector respectively were challenged by the petitioner before the State Government by way of Revision Application, but the same was also dismissed ... It is true that no period of limitation is prescribed for exercising such powers, but when no period of limitation is prescribed, then it is always desirable that it should be exercised within a reasonable time. The same depends on the facts o....
father Shri Kaluram was ex-facie illegal and void ab initio for the question came to be issued way back in the year 1972. ... patta which was issued by transgressing the jurisdiction was reason that the Sarpanch, acted on his own in a grossly illegal manner and issued the patta on revenue land which was never in
18.7.1960, but the period of limitation would start running from the date of discovery of illegal act of petitioner No.1. ... The grant of ''Patta”' is not by way of right, but it is by way of assistance by the Government, so that the landless persons who have no source of income, can earn their livelihood by cultivating the land. ... Accordingly, the Collector cancelled the patta, which was issued on 4-1-1994 and came to hold that the said sale deed is void ab #HL_ST....
Panchayat Raj Act then in that circumstances once initial grant of patta in his favour is without jurisdiction/ void ab initio as he is not eligible for the same as per the procedure as provided for grant of patta rather the said act is nothing but amounts to be outcome of fraud played on behalf of the ... him by way of patta/ lease as he falls under the backward category as per the provisions provided under Section 198 of the Act. ... ... Aggrieved by the said fact, petitioner for re....
Consequently, alleged deed of transfer / agreement is sham document and is void, ab initio & non est in the eyes of law. ... Feeling aggrieved, petitioners have approached this Court by way of question, was transferred in favour of respondent nos. 3 and 4; order Officer on the ground that Chand Ram @ Chanar Ram, father of lease hold land, therefore, alleged unregistered agreement executed in favour of respondent no. 3 and 4 was void
The other view is that even power under Section 9 of the Act is required to be exercised within reasonable time. However, when the action is required to be taken, as in the present case under Section 9, the impugned act cannot be validated only on the ground of lapse of considerable time. In other words, the act which is void ab initio is non-est and it can be declared as such at any point of time. Such act cannot be validated only on the ground that it has remained as such, without being disturbed, for considerably long period.
The defence of limitation which was based only on contention that the order has to be set aside by a court before it became invalid must, therefore, be rejected. The Hon’ble Apex Court in a celebrated judgment in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Syed Qamarali 1967(I) SLR 228, which was subsequently followed in many decisions, has authoritatively ruled that the order of dismissal having been made in breach of mandatory provision of the rules, such order of dismissal had, therefore, no legal existence and it was not necessary for the respondents to have the order set aside by the court.....
The order of regularisation is void ab initio, being without jurisdiction and can be set aside at any point of time, regardless of delay. The District Collector, therefore, was perfectly justified in cancelling the allotment, which was obtained by concealing the fact about the nature of land. Even the SDO did not have any authority to make such change. In the jamabandi of Svt. 2059-62, the land is entered as sivaichak gairmumkin 'Nadi'.
The learned counsel for petitioner has further argued that even if it is presumed that there is a delay in challenging the resolution No.3 dated 6.9.86 of the Gram Panchayat Pakka Sarana, then also the Collector has illegally dismissed the revision petition preferred by the petitioner, as the action of the Gram Panchayat for issuance of patta in favour of respondent No. He has placed reliance on the judgment passed by the larger Bench by this Court in Chiman Lal vs. 5 for the land, which forms part of the public way, is void ab initio and a void and nonest action of the Gram Panch....
Such act be validated only on the ground that it has remained as such, without being disturbed, for considerably long period. However, when the action is required to be taken, as in the preset case under Sec. 9, the impugned act cannot be validated only on the ground of lapse of considerable time. The other view is that even power under Sec. 9 of the Act is required to be exercised within reasonable time...." In other words, the act which is void ab initio is non-est and it can be declared as such at any point of time.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
