Bombay High Court
Rajabhau Uttamrao Madghe vs State Of Maharashtra, Through Its ... on 11 February, 2016
Author: A.S. Chandurkar
Bench: Vasanti A. Naik, A.S. Chandurkar
WP 5623/15 1 Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION No. 5623/2015
Rajabhau Uttamrao Madghe,
aged about 53 yrs, Occ. Agriculture,
R/o Civil Lines, Paratwada,
Tq. Achalpur, Dist. Amravati. PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Revenue Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.
2. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Achalpur,
Near Civil Court, Achalpur,
Tq. Achalpur, Dist. Amravati.
3. The Deputy Superintendent of Land Records,
Achalpur,
Taluka Achalpur, Dist. Amravati. RESPONDENTS
Shri G.K. Mundhada, counsel for the petitioner.
Shri N.S. Rao, Assistant Government Pleader for respondents.
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND
A.S. CHANDURKAR, JJ.
DATE : FEBRUARY 11 , 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)
RULE. Rule is made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
::: Uploaded on - 15/02/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 04:43:43 :::WP 5623/15 2 Judgment
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the communication dated 02.05.2012 issued by the respondent no.3, thereby refusing to mutate the name of the petitioner in the revenue records on the ground that the land in question is B-Tenure land and permission of the competent authority has not been obtained prior to its transfer.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that by virtue of sale-deed dated 03.06.1966, Nazul Plot No.11/1 was sold by one Shri Madhusudan Barlinge in favour of Smt.Latabai Kale. By the subsequent sale-deed dated 14.05.1980, Smt.Latabai Kale sold the aforesaid plot of land to the petitioner's mother. Thereafter, on 21.09.1998, the petitioner's mother by virtue of a registered will-deed bequeathed the said property in favour of the petitioner. The application for mutation dated 19.04.2012 moved by the petitioner was not entertained by the impugned order dated 02.05.2015.
4. It is submitted by Shri G.K. Mundhada, learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner that the provisions of Section 37-A of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 have come into force with effect from 03.03.2015 and as the title has been acquired prior to said date, the name of the petitioner deserves to be duly mutated without insisting for obtaining necessary permission.
::: Uploaded on - 15/02/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 04:43:43 :::WP 5623/15 3 Judgment
5. Shri N.S. Rao, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents, submitted that the document, on the basis of which the petitioner claims title, is a will-deed. He, however, does not dispute that all the documents have been executed prior to 03.03.2015.
6. Considering the fact that the provisions of Section 37-A of the Code of 1966 have been inserted with effect from 03.03.2015 and the fact that the documents of title are executed prior to said date, it would be necessary for the respondent no.3 to mutate the name of the petitioner, if there is no other legal impediment.
7. In view of the aforesaid, the order dated 02.05.2012 passed by the respondent no.3 is set aside. The respondent no.3 shall mutate the name of the petitioner in accordance with law and if there is no other legal impediment.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
APTE
::: Uploaded on - 15/02/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 04:43:43 :::