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…!
Power of Land Tribunal to Correct Survey Number Mistakes - The Land Tribunal has the authority to correct mistakes related to survey numbers under Section 48A(6) of the Land Reforms Act, 1961, especially when errors are clerical or typographical in nature and do not pertain to the identity of the land. Such corrections can include rectifying misdescriptions or typographical errors in survey numbers, provided they do not alter the fundamental nature or boundaries of the property. Sources: Chandravathi D/o Oovamma VS N. Subban Shiva Rao S/O Late N. Shiva - 2022 0 Supreme(Kar) 1450, SMT.CHANDRAVATHI vs SRI.N.SUBBAN SHIVA RAO - Karnataka, D. Ramaiah died VS Gutta Radhamma - Telangana, Church of God, Represented by its President George Tharakan, ECCIECIA, Palarivattam, Kochin, Kerala State VS K. Sadhasivan - Madras
Distinction Between Clerical Errors and Material Changes - The courts have distinguished between clerical or typographical mistakes and errors that materially affect the identity or boundaries of land. Corrections of clerical errors, such as wrong survey numbers due to typographical mistakes, are generally permissible without altering the core issues of the case. However, errors that change the survey number in a way that impacts the identity or boundaries may not be rectifiable by the Tribunal or court. Sources: Jibhau Sukhdev Deore VS Vishwas Ramchandra Dighavkar - 2023 Supreme(Bom) 1890 - 2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 1890, Patan Syed Khan Sayed Basha Khan VS P. Sayed Khan - Andhra Pradesh, Punjab National Bank Chief Manager Samver Road Branch Shri Rajesh K Bajaj VS Additional District Magistrate Collector Dhar - Madhya Pradesh
Role of Revenue Authorities and Judicial Bodies - Revenue authorities can correct entries in revenue records like the Basic Tax Register based on re-surveys, but the power to correct mistakes in survey numbers in judicial orders or tribunal decisions is limited to clerical or typographical errors. Courts and tribunals are empowered to rectify such clerical mistakes under specific provisions, but cannot review or alter substantive findings or conclusions. Sources: District Collector, Civil Station Road, Collectorate, Kollam vs Thangal Kunju, S/o. Vava Kunju - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 2897 - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2897, D. Ramaiah died VS Gutta Radhamma - Telangana
Judicial Precedents Supporting Correction of Mistakes - Several judicial decisions support the correction of survey number errors when they are clerical or typographical, especially when the boundaries and the identity of the land are not disputed. For example, errors in survey numbers mentioned in sale deeds or revenue records can be corrected if they do not affect the property’s identity. Sources: D. Ramaiah died VS Gutta Radhamma - Telangana, Patan Syed Khan Sayed Basha Khan VS P. Sayed Khan - Andhra Pradesh
Limitations and Conditions for Correction - Corrections are permissible primarily for clerical or accidental slip errors. Material alterations that change the fundamental description or identity of the land generally require a different legal process and are not rectifiable solely by the Tribunal or court. Amendments after trial or changes that affect the cause of action are also subject to restrictions. Sources: Jibhau Sukhdev Deore VS Vishwas Ramchandra Dighavkar - 2023 Supreme(Bom) 1890 - 2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 1890, Punjab National Bank Chief Manager Samver Road Branch Shri Rajesh K Bajaj VS Additional District Magistrate Collector Dhar - Madhya Pradesh, Patan Syed Khan Sayed Basha Khan VS P. Sayed Khan - Andhra Pradesh
Analysis and Conclusion:The Land Tribunal does have the power to correct mistakes in survey numbers, but this power is confined to clerical or typographical errors that do not alter the fundamental identity or boundaries of the land. Such corrections are supported by statutory provisions (e.g., Section 48A(6) of the Land Reforms Act) and judicial precedents. Errors arising from accidental slips, typographical mistakes, or misdescription can be rectified by the Tribunal, provided they do not impact the core description of the property. However, material changes affecting the land’s identity or boundaries are beyond the Tribunal’s scope and may require other legal procedures.
Imagine finalizing a land reform order only to realize the survey number is wrong—a simple typo that could cost you your property rights. For landowners in Karnataka, this raises a critical question: Whether Land Tribunal has the Power to Correct Mistake in Survey Number? This issue often arises in proceedings under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, particularly Section 48-A(6). In this post, we explore the tribunal's authority, key limitations, supporting case laws, and practical insights. Note: This is general information, not legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your specific case.
The Land Tribunal, established under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, plays a pivotal role in determining tenancy rights, occupancy, and land ceilings. Section 48-A(6) grants it specific powers to amend its orders. Importantly, the Tribunal has the authority to correct clerical or typographical errors in its orders, including mistakes in mentioning survey numbersChandravathi D/o Oovamma VS N. Subban Shiva Rao S/O Late N. Shiva - 2022 0 Supreme(Kar) 1450.
This power is akin to Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), which allows courts to rectify clerical or arithmetical mistakes or errors arising out of accidental slips. However, it's strictly limited:- Corrections must address clerical or accidental slips, not review or re-examine the substantive order Chandravathi D/o Oovamma VS N. Subban Shiva Rao S/O Late N. Shiva - 2022 0 Supreme(Kar) 1450.- Verification of the correctness of the survey number and land details is essential before invoking this power Chandravathi D/o Oovamma VS N. Subban Shiva Rao S/O Late N. Shiva - 2022 0 Supreme(Kar) 1450.
For instance, if a survey number like Chandravathi D/o Oovamma VS N. Subban Shiva Rao S/O Late N. Shiva - 2022 0 Supreme(Kar) 1450 is mistyped due to a typographical error, and the land's identity remains undisputed, the tribunal may correct it. But substituting numbers that alter boundaries or extent crosses into prohibited territory.
Not all mistakes qualify for correction. Courts emphasize a clear distinction:
The Karnataka High Court has clarified: the Tribunal's power is confined to rectifying clerical or typographical errors in its previous orders and not reviewing its own ordersChandravathi D/o Oovamma VS N. Subban Shiva Rao S/O Late N. Shiva - 2022 0 Supreme(Kar) 1450. Similarly, the Madras High Court allows corrections under Section 152 CPC when there is no dispute regarding the identity, boundaries, or extent of the landSHANKERGOUDA VS GARANGOUDA - 1976 0 Supreme(Kar) 37STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS SHYAMKANT DATTATRAYA PATIL - 2006 0 Supreme(Bom) 88.
Several rulings reinforce these principles:
Karnataka High Court: In a case involving possession of land bearing survey No.110/1, the tribunal was urged to rectify the mistake by mentioning the correct survey numberSMT.CHANDRAVATHI vs SRI.N.SUBBAN SHIVA RAO - Karnataka. It proceeded to correct its error in mentioning the wrong survey number.
Tribunal's Verification Duty: Therefore, even if there is a mistake in mentioning the survey number in Form 7... it was permissible for the Land Tribunal to verify and ascertain the correctness of the numbers and pass appropriate orders. Y. S. RAMACHANDRA RAO VS STATE OF KARNATAKA - 2005 Supreme(Kar) 115 - 2005 0 Supreme(Kar) 115.
Clerical Error in Decrees: But, in the copy of the decree... the Survey Number of one land property is wrongly shown as 21/5 whereas the correct Survey Number is 91/5. Courts can correct such judgments without altering pleadings BUTTO BAI w/o LAKSHMAN GOUD VS DUMRI s/o SADDU GOUD (deceased) thr. Legal Heirs JAINWATI w/o DUMRI LAL GOUD - 2024 Supreme(MP) 295 - 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 295NAGALINGAPPA VS INDIRAWWA - 2002 Supreme(Kar) 567 - 2002 0 Supreme(Kar) 567.
Limitations in Claims: While there cannot be any dispute with regard to the power of the Tribunal to correct such mistake, but the question... is, whether there was any such mistake bona fide... Nirmala VS Chandayya Poojari - 2016 Supreme(Kar) 736 - 2016 0 Supreme(Kar) 736.
Revenue Records: Revenue authorities may correct Basic Tax Register (BTR) entries post re-survey, but tribunals stick to clerical fixes in orders District Collector, Civil Station Road, Collectorate, Kollam vs Thangal Kunju, S/o. Vava Kunju - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2897N Subban Shiva Rao S/o Late N Shiva Rao VS M Nagesh S/o Late Oovamma - 2021 Supreme(Kar) 738 - 2021 0 Supreme(Kar) 738.
The Supreme Court and High Courts consistently hold that corrections are for inadvertent slips, not substantive modifications, backed by clear evidenceChandravathi D/o Oovamma VS N. Subban Shiva Rao S/O Late N. Shiva - 2022 0 Supreme(Kar) 1450.
While tribunals handle order corrections, revenue bodies like Tahsildars have powers under the Survey and Boundaries Act for record updates. However, no provision... conferring any authority on the Tahsildar to correct a mistake committed... during resurvey without proper process District Collector, Civil Station Road, Collectorate, Kollam vs Thangal Kunju, S/o. Vava Kunju - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2897.
Recommendations for Landowners:- Gather evidence: Podi maps, sale deeds, surveyor reports proving clerical nature.- File promptly: No fixed limitation, but act before finality A. SUSHEELA VS 1ST LAND TRIBUNAL, PUTIUR - 2005 Supreme(Kar) 682 - 2005 0 Supreme(Kar) 682.- Verify identity: Ensure no boundary/extent disputes.- Seek judicial review if denied: Approach High Court under Article 226.
In summary:- Yes, the Land Tribunal generally has power under Section 48-A(6) to correct clerical or typographical mistakes in survey numbers, if bona fide and accidental, without altering land identity or boundaries Chandravathi D/o Oovamma VS N. Subban Shiva Rao S/O Late N. Shiva - 2022 0 Supreme(Kar) 1450.- No, for substantive changes like new survey numbers impacting extent—pursue fresh proceedings Jibhau Sukhdev Deore VS Vishwas Ramchandra Dighavkar - 2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 1890.- Thorough verification is crucial to prevent misuse as disguised reviews.- Courts should verify the nature of the mistake thoroughly before exercising this power Chandravathi D/o Oovamma VS N. Subban Shiva Rao S/O Late N. Shiva - 2022 0 Supreme(Kar) 1450.
Key Takeaway: The tribunal can fix survey number slips supported by evidence, but attempts beyond this scope may be challenged as ultra vires. Land disputes hinge on precise descriptions—proactive correction within limits safeguards rights.
For tailored advice, consult a local expert in Karnataka land laws. Stay informed, protect your property!
#LandTribunal #SurveyNumber #KarnatakaLaw
It is difficult to hold that a mistake committed by the Settlement Commissioner in including the land in erroneous Gat number would be a clerical or arithmetical mistake or an error arising out of accidental slip or omission. ... This is because addition of land in Gat number also results in corresponding decrease in area of that land in another Gat number#HL_....
He refers to the Form No.7 and submits that the land bearing survey No.110/1 was claimed in Form No.7 and the Tribunal had granted survey No.108/1A2 instead of the said survey number and it is under this circumstance, a request was made before the Tribunal to rectify the mistake by mentioning the correct ... of claimant/Smt.Oovamma we....
and it is under this circumstance, a request was made before the Tribunal to rectify the mistake by mentioning the correct survey number of the property. ... Oovamma were in possession of land bearing survey No.110/1 had 11 proceeded to correct the mistake committed by it in mentioning wrong survey nu....
The notice (Annexure P/5) as per Rule 8 (1) of the Security Interest (Enforcement), Rules, 2002 mentioned the correct survey number of the property and publication of the notice in English Daily Newspaper (Annexure P/6) also mentioned the correct survey number of the mortgaged property. ... This writ petition has been preferred on the ground that error pertaining to the khasra ....
He submits that Sl.No.1 of item No.2 of suit schedule property is to an extent of Ac.1.49 cents of dry land in S.No.1331/1B, but due to typographical mistake, the survey number is mentioned in the plaint as 1303/2-1B, instead of 1331/1B in the plaint schedule, which he intended to correct by seeking ... The present amendment, which the 1st petitioner as sought, is only to correct the #HL....
In such a case, I would not go to the extent of holding that the Court has no power to correct the judgment, decree or order which has repeated the mistake. In doing so, the Court need not correct the pleadings or the document but its own decision. ... Infact, there was no dispute with regard to identity of land. It has been established in various decisions referred to above that if there is not dispute o....
No provision of the Survey and Boundaries Act, 1961 conferring any authority on the Tahsildar to correct a mistake committed by the officials during resurvey is also pointed out. ... This shows that the Revenue Authorities had the power to correct the entries in the BTR consequent upon re- survey. We observe that the present dilemma of the Revenue Officials arises from the incorporation ....
Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents would submit that it is a mere clerical error and that the tribunal is empowered to correct the same and such a power is vested in the tribunal under the provisions of Section 48A(6) of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (for short ‘Land Reforms Act ... Yet again it is the case of misdescription of the survey #HL_STA....
Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that in the event of boundaries established the correct survey number specified in the document, the relief sought for correction of wrong survey number is admissible. He placed reliance on the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sheodhyan Singh v. ... Ex.A1 recitals clearly disclose the specific boundaries of subject land and DW-5, former p....
Earlier, the plaintiff filed an application seeking amendment of the plaint in respect of the suit survey number. Originally, the suit was filed in respect of Survey No. 113/1A2. Thereafter, by way of amendment, the survey number was amended as 113/2. ... The mentioning of re-survey number is only to identify the property through revenue records. ... Item No.1 consists ....
While there cannot be any dispute with regard to the power of the Tribunal to correct such mistake, but the question in the instant case is, whether there was any such mistake bona fide in laying a claim in respect of a particular survey number by the claimant, who has not shown why he did not file the application in respect of Sy. No. 138/IB. No. 20080 of 1991, in view of the ratio laid down in Pakeera Moohja's case which has application to the facts of the present case, the....
He has also relied upon another decision in Shah Hyder Beig's, wherein it has been held that "it is now a well-settled principle of law and we need not dilate on this score to the effect that while no period of limitation is fixed but in the normal course of events, the period, the party is required for filing a civil proceeding ought to be the guiding factor. While it is true that this extraordinary jurisdiction is available to mitigate the sufferings of the people in general but it is not ou....
It is further argued that the petitioners being the villagers are illiterate and that by error they have not included the correct survey number and the correct extent of the land in Form 7. If the surveyor after actual measurement of the land has pointed out the correct extent and correct survey number, it was incumbent upon the Land Tribunal to correct order. Emphasising the words 'in any order' employed in the aforesaid proviso, learned Senior counsel argues that even the o....
A Division Bench of this Court in Padmaraja athikari v Land Tribunal, Karkal, W. P. No. 20080 of 1991 (LR), DD: 15-7-1993 (DB ). Therefore, even if there is a mistake in mentioning the survey number in Form 7 by the contesting respondents, it was permissible for the Land Tribunal to verify and ascertain the correctness of the numbers and pass appropriate orders. It cannot be said that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to pass such order". has held that the applicants being vil....
Similarly, the Survey Number of the house property is shown as 12/5. But, in the copy of the decree in the judgment dated 12-9-2002, the Survey Number of one land property is wrongly shown as 21/5 whereas the correct Survey Number is 91/5. It is stated on behalf of the appellant that the above appeal was allowed by this Court on 12-9-2002 and the decree was drawn accordingly.
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
