Sheoji
Mmahto & Ors Vs. The Additional Member, Board of Revenue & Ors [1996] INSC
1582 (10 December 1996)
K. Ramaswamy,
G.T. Nanavati
ACT:
HEAD NOTE:
O R D
E R
This
appeal by special leave arises from the order of the Patna High Court, made on December 10,1984 in CWJC No. 5491/84 dismissing the
writ petition in limine.
The
admitted facts are that Sukhdeo Raj is the predecessor in interest of
respondents. Gulabo Devi and others had purchased one katha of land towards the
east land of the appellants from Sukhdeo Rai by a sale deed executed on
December 31,1979 Which was got registered on for February 8,1980. The
appellants had filed an application for preemption of the land on the ground
that he, being the adjoining raiyat, by operation of Section 16 (3) of the
Bihar Lands Ceiling Act was entitled to preemption of the said land from the
contesting respondent. The Tribunal help in favour of the appellant respondent
The Collector in the proceedings dated August 11, 1984 held against the appellants. The
High Court has dismissed the writ petition in limine as stated earlier. The question,
therefore is:
Whether
the view of the collector is correct in law? Section 16(3)(1) Reads as under
"16(3)(1) When any transfer of land is made after the commencement of this
Act to any person other than a co-sharer or a Raiyat of adjoining land, any
co-sharer of the transferor or any Raiyat holding land adjoining the land
transferred shall be entitled within three months of the date of registration
of the document of transfer to make an application before the Collector in the
prescribed manner for the terms and conditions contained in the said deed:
provided
that no such application shall be entertained by the Collector unless the
purchase money together with a sum equal to ten per cent thereof is deposited
in the prescribed manner within the said period.
(ii)
on such deposit being made the co-sharer of the Raiyat shall be entitled to be
put in possession of the land irrespective under clause (i) is pending for
decision:
Provided
that where the application is rejected, the co-sharer or the Raiyat as the case
may be shall be enacted from the land and possession thereof shall be restored
to the transferee and the transferee shall be entitled to be paid a sum equal
ten per cent of the purchase money out of the deposit made under clause (i)."
A reading of section 16(3)(i) Clearly indicates that when any transfer of land
is made after the commencement of the act, to any person other than a co-sharer
or a Raiyat of adjoining and any co-sharer of the land transferred or any Raiyat
holding land adjoining the land transferred shall be entitled within three
months of the date of registration of the document of transfer to make an
application of the collector in the prescribed manner for the transfer in the
said deed. It is not in dispute that Tribunal below help the lad sold to the
respondents by registered sale deed. An application was also filed within three
months from the date of the registration of the document. Under these circumstances
the two conditions having been satisfied by operation of section 16 (3) (i),
the appellants are entitled to preemption of the said land. The High Court
therefore, was clearly in error in refusing to entertain the writ petition
dismissed in limine. The collector was also Wrong in allowing the appeal.
The
appeal is accordingly. The order of the High Court as also of the collector are
set aside. No costs.
Back
Pages: 1 2