Heeruram Sonkar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

For Petitioners : Mr. Mahendra Dubey, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, P.L. For Respondent No.4 : Mr. Dhiraj Kumar Wankhede, Advocate

¶21

Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu

¶22

Order On Board

¶23

12/07/2024 Sd/- Sd/-

¶24

Petitioner has filed this petition seeking following relief (s) :-

¶25

“10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to

¶26

2

¶27

issue an appropriate and suitable writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) directing the Respondent no. 2 and 3 to register the Sale Deed in relation to sale of Petitioners' agriculture land bearing Khasra No. 82, Rakba 2.89 hectare situated in village Pinkapar, tehsil Daundilohara, district Balod, CG and allow the consequential mutation in the land record under the provisions of CG Land Revenue Code), in the interest of justice.

¶28

10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass any other order which may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances.”

¶29

Learned counsel for petitioners submits that petitioners are the registered owner of the land bearing Kh. No.82, area 2.89 hectares of land situated at Village Pinkapar, Tehsil Daundilohara, District Balod (C.G.). However, when petitioners made an attempt to execute sale deed based on the agreement to sale of the land vide Annexure P-2, they were not permitted to execute the sale deed. The reasons assigned by Registrar is that for executing sale deed, permission of Collector is necessary. He submits that petitioners are non-tribal persons and therefore, prior permission of the Collector to transfer the land is not necessary. When petitioners sought information from the office of the Collector that is there any bar in transferring of the land under Right to Information Act, the information which is supplied mentions that “no such information is available” therefore, the respondents authorities cannot object the execution of sale deed

¶30

3

¶31

without there being any legal objection or any contraventions of provisions of law.

¶32

Learned State counsel submits that as per the proceedings initiated by NHI, respondent No.4 for constructing National Highway crossing through area where the land of the petitioner is also falling.

¶33

Learned counsel for respondent No.4 though raised an objection with regard to payer made by petitioner. However, he submits that National Highway has prepared DPR for construction of Raipur Hyderabad four lane (express way). Under the DPR, village where the land of petitioners is situated is also coming. He also submits that National Highway and many other government schemes are to be proposed and for this purpose, State has to acquire land of villagers. It has come to the notice of the respondent that by virtue of sale, the big chunk of lands are being made into small plots, and therefore, the said memorandum has been issued by respondent authorities to check the loss to State exchequer by playing mischief.

¶34

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioners are in dire need of money and therefore, they want to dispose of their land. Petitioners are not selling part of the land of that khasra, but they are selling entire land available of that particular khasra owned by petitioners.

¶35

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission

¶36

4

¶37

of learned counsel for the respective parties, agreement (Annexure P-2) entered into by petitioners on 01.11.2021 making substantial payment through cheque, this petition is disposed of at this stage directing the respondents to permit petitioners to execute sale deed pursuant to the agreement to sale dated 01.11.2021 (Annexure P-2).

¶38

The order will remain applicable in respect of the present petitioners and it should not be cited as precedent.

¶39

Accordingly, this petition is disposed off with the aforesaid directions and observations.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶42

Balram

Heeruram Sonkar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Heeruram Sonkar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dilip Patre Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajnesh Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Anuradha Khare Vs High Court of Chhattisgarh

Bank of Baroda Vs Tehsildar

Rajesh Rao Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vishal Mishra Alias Baba Vs State of Chhattisgarh