SHEOJI MAHTO AND ORS. versus THE ADDITIONAL MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE AND ORS.

Citation: [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R. 808 · Decided: 10-12-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
SHEOJI MAHTO AND ORS. 
v. 
THE ADDITIONAL MEMBER, BOARD OF 
REVENUE AND ORS. 
DECEMBER 10, 1996 
IK. RAMASWAMY AND G.T. NANA VAT!, JJ.j 
Bihar La11d Refonns (Fixation of Ceiling Area a11d Acq11isitio11 of 
Surplus La11d) Act, 1961: Section 16(3). 
Pre-emptio11-Application filed by appellants for pre- emptio11 of la11d 
sold to respo11de11ts by sale deed-Applicatio11 filed within three months from 
the date of registratio11 of the docume11t-Tribu11al holding in favour of 
appellants 011 the gro1111d that appellants---:Raiyats were holding iand adjoi11-
ing the land sold to respo11dents-Collector holding against the appel-
D la11ts-High Court dismissing appellants' writ in limine-Appeal-Held 
conditions under section 16(3)(i) were satisfied-17ierefore appel/a11ts were 
entitled to pre-emptio11. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 465 of 
E 1986 
F 
G 
From the Judgment and Order dated 10.12.84 of the Patna High 
Court in C.W.J.C. No. 5491 of 1984 
M. Pankaj Bala Varina for D.B. Vobra for the Appellants. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the Patna High 
Court, made on December 10, 1984 in CWJC No.5491184 dismissing the 
writ petition in limine. 
The admitted facts are that Sukhdeo Rai is the predecessor-
in-interest of the respondents. Gulabo Devi and others had purchased one 
Katha of land towards the east of the land of the appellants from Sukhdeo 
Rai by a sale deed executed on December 31, 1979 which was got 
registered on February 8, 1980. The appellants had filed an application for 
H. pre-emption of the land on the ground that be, being the adjoining raiyat, 
808 
-
SHEOJIMAJITO v. ADDL.MEMBER,BD.OFREV. 
809 
by operation of Section 16(3) of the Bihar Lands Ceiling Act, was entitled A 
to pre-emption of the said land from the contesting respondent. The 
Tribunal held in favour of the appellant and ultimately 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)(i) reads as under: 
B 
"16(3)(i) 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 C 
Registration of the document of transfer, to make an application before 
the Collector in the prescribed manner for the. transfer of the land to him 
on the terms and conditions 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 D 
ten per cent thereof is deposited in the prescribed maJIIler within 
the said period. 
(ii) On such deposit being made the cO'sharer or the raiyat shall 
be entitled to be put in possession of the land irrespective of the E 
fact that the application 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 lie enacied from the land 
and possession thereof shall be restored to the trans(eree and the 
transferee shall be entitled to be paid a sum equal to ten per cent 
F 
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 land, any co-sharer of the trans-
feror or any raiyat holding land adjoining the land transferred, shall be G 
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 transfer of the land to him on the terms and conditions 
contained in the said deed. It is not in dispute that Tribunal below held 
the appellants to be raiyats holding land adjoining to the land sold to the H 
810 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996) SUPP. 9 S.C.R. 
A 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 pre•emption of the sl
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.