Dismissed

Md. Azad Ali Sk v. the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Gauhati HC5 Sept 2019WP(C)/6729/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the judgment of the Assam Board of Revenue upholding the Settlement Officer's order cancelling a Patta issued to the petitioner. The Court found a pending title dispute regarding the joint land and held the Board's view that no separate Patta can be issued without partition was correct, dismissing the petition.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; LCR sent back; no costs awarded. Entitlement for separate Patta governed by Title Suit No. 461/2015.

Md. Azad Ali Sk Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors. — Landlord and Tenant | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010224462016

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 6729/2016

¶5

1:MD. AZAD ALI SK

¶6

S/O LT. JAYNAL SK. R/O VILL- BALAJAN PART-I, P.O. and P.S. GAURIPUR DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 8 ORS

¶9

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006.

¶10

2:THE SETTLEMENT OFFICER DHUBRI and KOKRAJHAR DISTRICTS P.O. and P.S. DHUBRI DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM.

3:SRI HAIDAR ALI

4:SRI GOLZAR ALI

5:SRI FAIZAR ALI

6:AZIBAR RAHMAN

THE RESPONDENT NOS. 3 4

¶16

5 AND 6 ARE SONS OF LATE MOHIRUDDIN RESIDENT OF VILL- BALAJAN PART-I P.O. and P.S. GAURIPUR IN THE DIST. OF DHUBRI ASSAM.

¶17

7:SRI SURAT ALI

¶18

Page No.# 2/5

¶19

8:SRI SAIYAD ALI RESPONDENT NOS. 7 and 8 ARE THE SON OF LT. MOSORUDDIN

¶20

9:SMTI. MAZIRAN BEWA D/O LT. MOSORUDDIN RESPONDENT NOS. 7 8 AND 9 ARE RESIDENTS OF VILL- BALAJAN PART-I P.O. and P.S. GAURIPUR IN THE DIST. OF DHUBRI ASSAM

¶21

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.B DAS

¶22

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶23

BEFORE

¶24

THE Hon’ble MR. JUSTICE PRASANTA KUMAR DEKA

¶25

ADVOCATES

¶26

For the Petitioners : Mr. S. Nath. Advocate.

¶27

For the respondents : Ms. S. D. Saikia, Advocate.

¶28

Ms. N. Bordoloi, Govt. Advocate.

¶29

Date of hearing : 05.09.2019.

¶30

Date of judgment : 05.09.2019 .

¶31

JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)

¶32

05.09. 2019

¶33

Heard Mr. S. Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned

¶34

counsel for the respondent 1 and 2. Also Heard Ms. S.D.Saikia, learned counsel appearing on behalf of private respondent nos. 3 to 9.

¶35

The present petitioner purchased a plot of land from the original owner by way of a

¶36

valid Registered Sale Deeds and on the strength of the said purchase the name of the

¶37

Page No.# 3/5

¶38

petitioner was mutated over the land covering original Dag No. 352 of Village Balajan under Golokganj Revenue Circle measuring 10 Bighas 1 Katha 5 lessas which was standing in the names of Fazal Uddin Sk, Mosoruddin Sk, Kasaruddin Sk and Mohiruddin Sk. Out of the said total land measuring 10 Bighas 1 Katha 5 lessas, the petitioner purchased land measuring 2 Bighas 2 Kathas 10 Lechas and during the Re-Settlement Operation a separate Patta No. 499 and New Dag No. 595/163 was issued in the name of the present petitioner namely Azad Ali Sk.

¶39

Being aggrieved on the action of the Settlement Officer of issuing a separate Patta No. 499 out of the Joint Patta, the legal heirs of the said owners filed Misc Case No. 33/2015 before the Settlement Officer, Dhubri praying for cancellation of the Patta in the name of the petitioner. Vide order dated 06.02.2016, the Settlement Officer, Dhubri directed to cancel the Patta No. 499 issued in favour of the petitioner in Misc Case No. 33/2015. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 147 read with Section 151 of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 against the order passed by the Settlement Officer, Dhubri which was registered as Case No. 30RA (DRB)/2016 before the Hon’ble Assam Board of Revenue.

¶40

The petitioner already filed Title Suit No. 461/15 in the Court of learned Munsiff no. 2 at Dhubri seeking his right, title and interest over the said land measuring 2 Bighas 2 Kathas 10 lechas purchased vide Sale Deed Nos. 6353/1982 and 7670/1983. The said appeal was disposed of vide judgment dated 28.10.2016 by the Hon’ble Assam Board of Revenue holding that the order dated 06.02.2016 passed by the Settlement Officer, Dhubri in Misc Case No. 33/5015 was proper and lawful.

¶41

The petitioner challenged the said judgment dated 28.10.2016 passed in Case No.

¶42

Page No.# 4/5

¶43

30RA(DRB)/2016 by the Hon’ble Assam Board of Revenue and has filed this writ petition challenging the said judgment.

¶44

Mr. Nath submits that prior to the issuance of separate Patta No. 499 in the name of the present petitioner a Title Suit No. 461/2015 was filed for declaration of his right title and interest and other consequential reliefs. The said suit is contested by the private respondents. It was his submission that the petitioner has the right to purchase the land and vendors also have the right to sale the joint property as the Sale Deed has not yet been challenged in suit by filing counter claim. Under such circumstances, the issuance of Patta is proper if the provisions under the Assam Land Revenue Regulation are considered. In response to the said submission, the learned counsel for the private respondents submits that there is no error apparent in the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Assam Board of Revenue. Moreover, referring to the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the present respondents before the Assam Board of Revenue, Ms. Saikia submits that land covered by the joint patta can very well be sold to other but possession could not be delivered without partition and as such the impugned judgment passed by the Assam Board of Revenue is proper which requires no interference by this court.

¶45

I have given due consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel. Admittedly, there is a Title Suit pending preferred by the present petitioner, dispute is in respect of issuance of separate Patta out of the joint Patta land without there being any partition. The view taken by the Hon’ble Assam Board of Revenue upholding the finding of the Settlement Officer, Dhubri that without partition, separate Patta cannot be issued is a proper finding. Further by way of the impugned judgment, liberty is also granted to the petitioner to approach the appropriate court of law for redressal his grievances. Regulation 100 under the

¶46

Page No.# 5/5

¶47

Assam Land Revenue Regulation, 1886 also stipulates that if an objection is raised in a proceeding for partition like dispute in question of title and the same had not been decided by a court of competent jurisdiction, the Deputy Commissioner shall stay his proceedings for such time as, in his opinion, is sufficient to admit of a suit being instituted in the Civil Court to try the objection of title raised in the partition proceeding.

¶48

From the perusal of the contention of the learned counsel recorded by the Assam Board of Revenue, in my opinion there is a dispute in respect of title and possession of land between the parties. There is no error apparent in the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Board of Revenue, Assam. Accordingly this writ petition has no merit, however the entitlement of the petitioner for a separate Patta covering the land purchased by him through the Sale Deeds shall be governed by the outcome in Title Suit No. 461/2015 in the court of learned Munsiff No. 2 at Dhubri.

¶49

Send back the LCR, no costs.

¶50

JUDGE

¶51

Comparing Assistant

Md. Azad Ali Sk v. the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Azad Ali Sk v. the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chhatulal Sah Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Sidananda Kaman Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Prabin Bordoloi Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Kumud Das Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Barimakha Mahila Samity and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Ramen Lahakar Vs Himanga Kishore Sarma and Anr.