DAULAT SINGH (D) THR. LRS. versus THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS

Citation: [2020] 11 S.C.R. 845 · Decided: 08-12-2020 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: N.V. RAMANA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
845
DAULAT SINGH (D) THR. LRS.
v.
THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS
(Civil Appeal No. 5650 of 2010)
DECEMBER 08, 2020
[N. V. RAMANA, S. ABDUL NAZEER AND
SURYA KANT, JJ.]
Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act,
1973: s.15 – Power to reopen cases – Limitation period – Relevant
dates for determination of issue of limitation is the date of order
sought to be reopened and the date of issuance of show-cause
notice under s.15 of the Ceiling Act of 1973.
Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 – ss.30C, 30D, 30DD – Ceiling
limit – Appellant was owner of 254.2 bighas of land – On
19.12.1963, he gifted away 127.1 bighas of land to his son and
thereafter he was left with 17.25 standard acres of land – Proceeding
was initiated under the ceiling law but same was dropped on
14.04.1972 with observation that amendment of s.30DD of the Act,
1955 was effective from 31.12.1969 and since the gift deed was
executed before the said amendment, the said transfer was valid –
By notice dated 15.03.1982, the Revenue Ceiling Department re-
opened the case of the appellant – Authorities held that the appellant
was holding land over and above the ceiling limit – High Court,
while passing the impugned order, held the registered gift deed dated
19.12.1963 to be invalid on the basis that it did not meet the
requirements as provided under s.122 of the Transfer of Property
Act, 1882 – High Court observed that gift deed did not show
acceptance of gift by the donee, rather it seemed that donee was
even unaware of the gift – High Court held that appellant was
holding 4.5 standard acres of land in excess of ceiling limit –
Aggrieved land owner filed instant appeal – Held: The recitals in
the gift deed indicated that donor intended to part with ownership
and possession immediately after the execution of the gift deed –
Mutation entry in the Revenue Record reflected that half portion of
appellant’s land was bestowed as a gift by him to his son through a
registered instrument of gift – Even in the statement of the appellant,
[2020] 11 S.C.R. 845
845
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
846
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 11 S.C.R.
he has stated that the transferee-son was living separately and was
cultivating the said gifted property and that he was in possession of
an ox and equipments for ploughing and agriculture – These facts
were reiterated by the transferee also in his statement – The
statements of transferor and the transferee clearly indicated that
the transferee had the equipment and skills and was sustaining
himself as an agriculturalist – Lastly, the said transfer was executed
way before the cut-off date stipulated under s.30DD i.e. 31.12.1969
– Therefore, the registered gift deed was a bona fide transfer
squarely covered within the ambits of s.30DD, which intended to
protect the rights of agriculturalists – The transfer of the land being
valid under s.30DD, the ceiling area of the appellant fell within the
ceiling limit as provided under s.30C – Rajasthan Imposition of
Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973.
Transfer of Property Act, 1882: ss.122, 123 – Whether the
registered gift deed executed by appellant was valid in the eyes of
law – Held: For a gift to be valid, it must be gratuitous in nature
and must be made voluntarily – The said giving away implies a
complete dispossession of the ownership in the property by the donor
– Acceptance of a gift by the donee can be done anytime during the
lifetime of the donor – Act of receiving willingly, acceptance can be
inferred by the implied conduct of the donee – The recitals in the
gift deed indicated that donor intended to part with ownership and
possession immediately after the execution of the gift deed –
Mutation Record clearly reflected that half portion of appellant’s
land was bestowed as a gift by him to his son through a registered
instrument of gift – Furthermore, the statement rendered by the
appellant before the Additional District Magistrate indicated that
the donee was already a major at the time of the execution of the
gift deed and after execution of the gift deed the donee started
cultivating on the same – This statement of the appellant was
completely supported by the statement made by the donee before
the Additional District Magistrate in which donee had stated that,
as he did not get along with his step-mother, he started living
separately and the land was transferred to him by virtue of gift
deed was under his possession and he was cultivating the same –
Therefore, these circumsta

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.