Dismissed

Dillip Kumar Dey v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC9 Nov 2023WP(C)/14637/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the lower court orders refusing to register a sale deed. The petitioner was directed to submit the original sale deed along with documents converting the land from leasehold to freehold within two weeks for reconsideration.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders set aside; petitioner allowed two weeks to submit original sale deed and conversion documents for reconsideration.

Dillip Kumar Dey Vs State of Odisha — Writ and Judicial Review | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CU TTACK Date: 10-Nov-2023 10:33:08

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶3

W.P.(C). NO.14637 OF 2023 Dillip Kumar Dey …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. Jiban Ranjan Dash, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha and others …. Opp. Parties

¶7

Mr. Debendra Kumar Mohanty, Additional Standing Counsel

¶8

CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

09.11.2023

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶14

This writ petition has been filed to set aside the order dated 23^rd November, 2022(Annxure-4) passed by the Sub-Registrar, Jaleswar in Refusal Appeal No.01 of 2022. The Petitioner also assails the order dated 29^th March, 2023 (Annexure-6) passed by District Registrar-cum-Additional District Magistrate, Balasore in Registration Appeal No.01 of 2022 confirming the order passed under Annexure-4.

¶15

Mr. Dash, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the land in question was leased out in favour of the Petitioner. Accordingly, the ROR was issued with a note/entry in Column No.6 of the ROR to the effect that no alienation of the suit land can be made within a period of 10 years from the date of the lease without permission of the Competent Authority. In the meantime, more than ten years have already elapsed and the land in question has been converted from lease hold to free hold. Corrected ROR has also been issued in his name. But, while presenting the sale deed in question for registration in respect of a portion of the said

¶16

Page 1 of 3

¶17

// 2 //

¶18

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CU TTACK Date: 10-Nov-2023 10:33:08

¶19

land, the Petitioner could not produce the order passed by the Tahasildar, Jaleswar converting the land in question from lease hold to free hold and corrected ROR issued pursuant to the order passed by the Tahasildar. Accordingly, the Sub-Registrar, Jaleswar refused to register the sale deed on the ground that the land has not yet been converted to free hold land. Although the documents were filed before the appellate Court, but without considering the same the order under Annexure-6 has been passed. Hence, this writ petition has been filed assailing the orders under Annexure 4 and 6.

¶20

Mr. Mohanty, learned Additional Standing Counsel referring the counter affidavit submits that since the documents were not produced and the Petitioner did not obtain permission of the Competent Authority to alienate the property, the Sub-Registrar as well as the District Registrar have committed no error in refusing to register the sale deed. He, however, submits that if the Petitioner is in possession of the documents converting the land from lease hold to free hold, he can produce the same along with sale deed in original for re-consideration of registration of the sale deed.

¶21

Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the documents, this Court is of the prima facie view that the land in question has been converted from lease hold to free hold and in the meantime the ROR has been issued in favour of the Petitioner accordingly.

¶22

But the same requires examination and scrutiny by the SubRegistrar. Those documents were apparently not considered by the Sub-Registrar, Jaleswar as well as District Registrar, Balasore while passing impugned orders under Annexure 4 and 6 respectively. Thus, impugned orders are set aside and the writ petition is disposed of with an observation that in the event, the Petitioner

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

// 3 //

¶25

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CU TTACK Date: 10-Nov-2023 10:33:08

¶26

presents the sale deed in question in original along with the relevant documents within a period of two weeks including the order converting the land in question from lease hold to free hold as well as the ROR deleting the remarks/entries in Column-6 of the ROR, the same shall be considered in accordance with law giving opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner.

¶27

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶28

(K.R. Mohapatra)

¶29

Judge

¶30

Rojalin

¶31

Page 3 of 3

Dillip Kumar Dey v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dillip Kumar Dey v. State of Odisha

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

Sujit Ku.Padhi Vs Santosh Ku.Padhi

Debi Prasanna Pattanaik Vs Amulya Prasad Nayak

Nityananda Das Vs Sudhir Ku.Sahoo

Jayanti Panda Vs State of Odisha

Sitikantha Sahoo Vs Bichismita Sahoo

Fakir Mohan Khatua Vs State of Odisha