Dismissed

Munna Devi v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC7 Dec 2022L.P.A/48/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Letters Patent Appeal regarding abatement of pre-emption proceedings under the Bihar Land Reforms Act, the Patna High Court held that Section 16(4) covers all pending proceedings including execution cases by the DCLR. The Court found the claim for pre-emption abated, but dismissed the appeal against the Single Judge's order as no further interference was required.

What the court decided

AI extract

Munna Devi Vs The State of Bihar — Property and Title | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.48 of 2020

¶2

¶3

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14619 of 2019

¶4

======================================================

¶5

Munna Devi Wife of Late Bahiro Singh, Resident of Village- Dariyapur, P.S. Dariyapur, District- Saran.

¶6

Ram Babu Singh, Son of Late Bhairo Singh, Resident of Village- Dariyapur, P.S. Dariyapur, District- Saran.

¶7

Shyam Babu Singh, Son of Late Bhairo Singh, Resident of VillageDariyapur, P.S. Dariyapur, District- Saran.

¶8

Lal Babu Singh, Son of Late Bhairo Singh, Resident of Village- Dariyapur, P.S. Dariyapur, District- Saran.

¶9

Tuntun Singh, Son of Late Bhairo Singh, Resident of Village- Dariyapur, P.S. Dariyapur, District- Saran.

¶10

Raj Kali Devi, Daughter of Late Bhairo Singh, Resident of VillageDariyapur, P.S. Dariyapur, District- Saran.

¶11

... ... Appellant/s

¶12

Versus

¶13

The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶14

The Divisional Commissioner, Saran Division, Chapra.

¶15

The District Magistrate, Saran, Chapra.

¶16

The Additional Collector, Saran, Chapra.

¶17

The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Sonepur, Saran, Chapra.

¶18

Dukhan Singh, Son of Late Deo Kumar Singh, Resident of VillageDariyapur, P.S. Dariyapur, District- Saran.

¶19

... ... Respondent/s

¶20

======================================================

¶21

Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Harshvardhan Shivsundaram, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Md. Khurshid Alam (AAG12) For the Respondent No. 6 : Mr. Prakash Chandra Jha, Advocate ======================================================

¶22

Patna High Court L.P.A No.48 of 2020 dt.07-12-2022 2/6

¶23

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR)

¶24

Date : 07-12-2022

¶25

Heard Mr. Harshvardhan Shivsundaram,

¶26

learned advocate for the appellants, Mr. Khursid Alam

¶27

for the State and Mr. Prakash Chandra Jha for the respondent No. 6.

¶28

The appellants are the pre-emptors, whose claim for pre-emption was allowed uptill the revisional authority. Thereafter, the purchaser, who is respondent No. 6 herein, preferred an application before the Bihar Land Tribunal viz., BLT Case No. 212 of 2019. During the pendency of aforenoted BLT case, Section 16 (3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 was repealed by the amending Act, 2019, incorporating Section 16 (4), which reads as follows:-

¶29

"(4)(i) After the repeal of subsection (3) of Section 16 of this Act, all

¶30

Patna High Court L.P.A No.48 of 2020 dt.07-12-2022

¶31

3/6

¶32

cases or proceedings pending before the State Government, the Board of Revenue, the Bihar Land Tribunal, the Divisional Commissioner, the Collector, the Additional Collector, the Deputy Collector Land Reforms or in any other Court, shall be deemed to be abated.

¶33

(ii) Pursuant to the repeal of sub-section (3) of Section 16 of this Act, any purchase money together with a sum equal to 10% thereof, already legally deposited shall be refunded, without any interest, to the depositor."

¶34

A perusal of the provision, referred to above, clearly reflects that after the repeal of sub-section 3 of Section 16 of the Act, all cases or proceeding pending before all authorities would be deemed to be abated.

¶35

Regard being had to the aforenoted

¶36

provision, the learned member of the BLT declared the proceedings to have abated. Before this was done, an application had already been filed by the appellants before the DCLR for execution, namely, directing the

¶37

Patna High Court L.P.A No.48 of 2020 dt.07-12-2022 4/6

¶38

purchaser for re-conveying the land to the appellants/pre-emptors. Those proceedings were dropped pursuant to the declaration made by the BLT. This was challenged before this Court vide CWJC No. 14619 of 2019.

¶39

The learned Single Judge vide order dated 24.07.2019, after referring to the provisions contained in Section 16 (4), was of the view that the effect of abatement was complete wiping off of the proceedings under Section 16 (3) of the Act of 1961.

¶40

Mr. Shivsundaram, learned Advocate for the appellants has contested on the ground that the rights of the appellants as pre-emptors had already been concretized, and the matter was only left to be executed by the executing court which, in all probabilities, would not be included within the definition of Court, as contemplated in the amending Act.

¶41

The aforenoted argument is not acceptable, for the reason that all the courts have been named in

¶42

Patna High Court L.P.A No.48 of 2020 dt.07-12-2022 5/6

¶43

the amending Act, namely, the State Government, the Board of Revenue, BLT, the Divisional Commissioner, the Collector, the Additional Collector and the Deputy Collector Land Reforms. Even High Courts have not been excluded from the interpretation of Courts in the amending clause.

¶44

Thus, it cannot be said that the matter pending before DCLR would not be a matter pending before any court. Even otherwise, the wordings of Section 16 (4) is very clear, which says that all cases or proceedings (emphasis provided by us) pending before the authorities shall be deemed to have been abated.

¶45

Thus, in the absence of re-conveyance of title to the pre-emptor, the pre-emption proceeding abates. The appellants are but entitled to return of the purchase money together with a sum of equal to 10 per cent thereof, but without any interest. Sub-clause (ii) of Section 16 (4) specifies the aforenoted obligation of the Department, namely, of returning the deposit price of

¶46

Patna High Court L.P.A No.48 of 2020 dt.07-12-2022 6/6

¶47

the land along with 10% of the amount of such purchase

¶48

price to the pre-emptor.

¶49

This being the situation, there is nothing for

¶50

us to interfere in the matter.

¶51

The appeal stands consigned.

¶52

(Ashutosh Kumar, J)

¶53

( Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)

¶54

SONALI/HR/-

¶55

AFR/NAFR	AFR
CAV DATE	NA
Uploading Date	.12.2022
Transmission Date	NA

Munna Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Munna Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sarjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

The Joint Secretary, Law Department Vs Jai Prakash Mishra

Ram Sumiran Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Surinder Prasad Vs The Union of India

Subhash Kumar, Vs the Union of India

Md. Hadis Ansari Vs The State of Bihar