RAMAN LAL BHAI LAL versus STATE OF GUJARAT

Citation: [2008] 2 S.C.R. 468 · Decided: 05-02-2008 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.V. RAVEENDRAN · Disposal: Case Allowed
Cited by 3 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

/ 
[2008] 2 S.C.R. 468 
A 
RAMAN LAL BHAI LAL 
v. 
STATE OF GUJARAT 
: (Civil Appeal No. 4420 of 2004) 
I 
B 
FEBRUARY 5, 2008 
[R.V. RAVEgNDRAN & LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA, JJ.] 
f 
Lands Ceiling : 
~. 
i 
c 
Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act, 1960: ss. 6(2), 8, 
20, 21, 37 -f Person - Meaning of-Agreement proposing to 
purchase land in joint names entered into by five couples -
I 
Agreement also stating that purpose was not joint cultivation 
of land - After purchase, they entered into another agreement 
recording d~vision of land into ten portions among them - Order 
D of Deputy: collector that a group of persons purchasing 
agricultural land together, being an association of persons, 
had to be treated as 'a person' under the Act and therefore 
they could: jointly hold only one unit in view of provision of 
s. 6(1) of the Ceiling Act and not five units as held by Mamlatdar 
I 
E - Correctness of - Held: Not correct - Mere combination of 
persons without any intention to carry out a joint venture would 
,,-
not conv~rt them into a body of individuals/association of 
persons in the absence of a deeming provision in a statute or 
I 
an agreement - Thus, each couple together with the members 
F of the family (excluding major sons) is a person entitled to 
j-
hold one µnit - Having regard to s. 6(2) of the Ceiling Act, the 
share of $ach couple (husband and wife) in the land, plus any 
other land individually held by them to be calculated to find 
out whether they held any land in excess of the ceiling limit -
G Directions issued - Bombay General Clauses Act, 1904 -
s.3(35) --1 Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural lands Act, 1948-
s. 63 - Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Amendment Act, 
-..j 
I 
1972 - s.8(1), (2), (3) and (4). 
I 
Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Amendment Act, 
H 
468 
~ 
RAMAN LAL BHAI LAL v. STATE OF GUJARAT 
469 
~ 
~ 
1972 - s.8(1), (2), (3) and (4) - Partition among co-owners A 
/ 
taking place on 30. 12. 1971 - Held: By virtue of s. 8, partition 
effected on 30. 12. 1971 was deemed to be made to defeat the 
object of Amendment Act, 1972 and consequently partition 
would have to be ignored while computing the surplus land. 
Interpretation of statutes: Use of word 'include' -
B 
Connotation of- Held: Connotes intention to enlarge meaning 
~ 
of word used in statufe. 
Words and phrases: 'person', 'body of individual', 
'association of persons' - Ordinary and legal meaning of 
c 
The five appellants alongwith their respective 
spouses entered into an agreement proposing to 
purchase about 175 acres of land in their joint names. The 
reason stated in the agreement forjoint purchase was to 
avoid entering into separate agreements with several D 
owners of the lands. They also agreed that there would 
be no collective or joint cultivation of the lands proposed 
--1 
to be purchased by them. They purchased 172 acres 36 
guntas of agricultural land under 4 sale deeds. After the 
purchase of the lands, these ten purchasers (five couples) E 
entered into another agreement recording that the total 
sale price of Rs.46,300/- was paid equally by all of them 
and division of land into ten portions among them. On 
their applications, mutation entry was made showing each 
co-owner as the separate owner of lands. 
F 
~ 
In land ceiling proceedings, the Mamlatdar issued a 
notice under s.20 of the Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling 
Act, 1960, to the co-owners seeking particulars of lands 
held by them to determine whether they held any surplus 
land. After considering their statements, Mamlatdar held G 
.,._ 
that the five couples were entitled to hold five units of 36 
acres each. He made a declaration that surplus holding 
. 
' 
was 1 acre, 31 guntas, which vested in the Government. 
Deputy Collector held that a group of persons or H 
470 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS . · 
• 
l . 
>'-
[2008]2 S.C.R. 
\ 
A association of persons,purchasing agricultural land 
. ' 
. 
together, had to be treated as ' a 'person' under the Act 
and therefore they could jointly hold only one unit in view 
of provision of s.6(1) of the Ceiling Act. As a consequence 
he determined the surplus land as 145 acres, 36. guntas. 
B Appellants filed revision before the Revenue Tribunal. The 
Tribunal upheld the decision of Deputy Collector by 
applying the definition of 'person' in the Ceiling Act. Single 
Judge of High Court allowed the petition of appellants and 
remanded the matter to. the Revenue Tribunal to decide 
C; whether the definition o
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.