Writ petition challenging orders in mutation proceedings dismissed. Court held sale deed remained unregistered, no transfer occurred, and concurrent findings established petitioner had no title.
Writ petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 38
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24500 of 2021
Petitioner :- Laxmi Chand Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 11 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- U.C. Chaturvedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. U.C. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel representing respondents 1, 2, 3 and 4.
This writ petition has been filed challenging order dated 05.11.2019, passed by respondent 2 Additional Commissioner (Administration), Saharanpur Division, District Saharanpur, in Revision No. 829 of 2019 (Laxmichand Vs. Sukhdev Singh and others), order dated 17.10.20219 passed by respondent 3 Additional Collector/Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, District Saharanpur, in Appeal No. 2676 of 2018 (Laxmi Chand Vs. Sukhdev Singh and another) and order dated 15.02.2018, passed by respondent 4 Tehsildar (Judicial), Saharanpur, District Saharanpur, in Case No. 201709601011980 (Smt. Nishat Vs. Shukhdev Singh), under Sections 34/36 U.P. Revenue Code.
It transpires from record that a sale deed dated 19.2.2016 was executed by respondent 5 Sukhdev Singh. in favour of petitioner. However, aforesaid sale deed could not be registered. During subsistence of aforesaid sale deed, respondent 5 Sukhdev Singh executed subsequent sale deed dated 18.05.0217 in favour of Nishat, the wife/mother of respondents 6, 7, 8 and 9. After execution of second sale deed, the vendee of aforesaid sale deed applied for mutation, which has been allowed in their favour. Against order of Tehsildar, petitioner preferred an appeal which was also dismissed. Aggrieved by order passed by Tehsildar (Judicial), Saharanpur, as well as Additional Commissioner (Administration), petitioner preferred a revision before Commissioner of concerned Division, which has also been dismissed. All the authorities have recorded concurrent finding that petitioner has no right, title and interest in the land in dispute. It is an admitted position that sale deed executed by respondent, in favour of petitioner has not yet been registered. Consequently, no transfer has taken place in favour of petitioner. In view of above, no illegality has been committed by respondents 2, 3 and 4 in negating the objection raised by petitioner in mutation proceedings.
In view of above, present writ petition fails and is liable to be dismissed.
It is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 18.10.2021 HSM
1 issue framed by the court
Whether unwritten sale deed confers title when mutation has been allowed in favour of subsequent vendee?
Laxmi Chand
State Of U.P.
Rajeev Misra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
