STATE OF GUJARAT versus NARGES K. PANTHAKY

Citation: [1995] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 734 · Decided: 02-11-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, B.L. HANSARIA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
STATE OF GUJARAT 
"· 
NARGES K. PANTHAKY 
NOVEMBER 2, 1995 
B 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, J.J.j 
Gujarat A1,"iu1lt11ral Lands Ceiling Act, JO(,(): 
S.8( 1 }-Detem1inarion of Ceiling area and swplus area-Agreement to 
C tran.1fer title in favour of mothe1~Since such a&"·eemellt is a compulsmily 
registerable document under S. 17 of Registration Act, non-Registration there-
of; the owner is not divested of the 1igh1 and Litle-Maller remilled to ceiling 
aulhmity to compute the ceiling area-Registration Act, S.17. 
D 
E 
While proceedings were initiated under the Gujarat Agricultural 
Lands Ceiling Act, 1960, the respondents claimed that under an agree-
ment, 30 acres of land was transferred in favour of the respondent's 
mother which was dnly recognised by mutation proceedings. The 
respondent's plea was accepted by the authorities and the High Court. 
Hence this appeal by the State Government. 
Allowing: the appeal, this Court 
B ELD : J. By operation of Section 17 of the Registration Act, 
agreen1ent transferring title is a compulsorily registerable document. 
Since it has not hl'cn registered, the oWnt'r has not been divested of the 
1=-
rig:ht 1 title and intert·st in the land and thu~ continued to be the owner of 
the land under the AL! [736-B] 
2. 'fhe 111atter is ren1itted to the ceiling authorit)' to ccnnpute the 
ceiling urea keeping in vie\V n·hal hus been held in this order. The 
G 
antiHn·ities 'rnuld takt' further action accor<ling to la\V. [736-C] 
CIVIL APPEL.LATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 10481 of 
199'i. 
From !he Judgment and Order dated 14.7.83 of the Gujarat High 
H Court in S.C.A. No. 2482 of Jl/81. 
734 
; 
.. 
STATE"· NARGES K. P ANTHAKY 
735 
Dushyant Dave and Ms. H. Wahi for the Appellant. 
R.P. Bhatt Ms. Neclam Kalsi and Vimal Dave, for the Rcspondcnl. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
Leave granted. 
The proceedings were initiated under the Gujarat Agricultural Lands 
Ceiling Act, 1960 (for short, "the Act") to determine the ceiling area and 
the surplus area. The respondent claimed that under an agreement dated 
October 14, 1969, thirty acres of land had been transferred in favour of the 
respondent's mother which was duly recognised by mutation proceedings 
dated 15.9.1971. The question is whether it is to defeat the provisions of 
the Act. Sub-section (1) of Section 8 of the Act reads thus : 
· "8. Transfers or partitions made after 15th .January 1959 but before 
commencement of this Act. (1) Where after 15th day of January, 
1959 but before the commencement of this Act or after 24th day 
of January, 1971, but before the specified date, any person has 
transferred whether by sale, gift, mortgage, with possession, ex-
change lease. surrender or otherwise or partitioned any land held 
by him, then notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the 
time being in force such transfer or partition shall, unless it is 
proved to the contrary, be deemed to have been made in anticipa-
tion in order to defeat the object of this Act. Where such transfer 
or partition was made after 15th day of .January 1959 but before 
the comn1enccmcnt of this Act or in order to defeat the object of 
the An1c1HJing Act of 1972 \Vlicrc such transfer \Vas n1a<lc after 
24th day of .January, 1971 hut bcfnrc the specified date." 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
A reading thereof \vould clearly indicate that nnt\vithstanding any-
thing contained in any la\\' for the time being in force such transfer or 
partition shall, unless it is proved to the contrary, he <lec1ne<l to have been 
made in anticipation in order to defeat the nbyct oft he Act. The question 
(J 
is whether this agrcen1cnt is a transfer. Shri R.P. Bhatl. learned senior 
counsel appearing for the respondent, has taken us through the agrccn1cnt 
\vhich had specifically stated that right, title and interest of the land \Vas 
conferred fnr tht: lirst tiine in favour of the rcspondcnt under this Jocu-
n1cnt. Therehy, the right title and inter~~!. hL:ld hy the O\Vncr of the land is 
H 
736 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1995] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 
A 
sought to be extinguished. In turn it is sought to be conferred in favour of 
the respondent for the first time under the document. By operation of 
Section 17 of the Registration Act, it is a compulsorily registerable docu-
ment. Since it has not been registered, the owner has not been divested of 
the right, title and interest in the land and thus continued to be the owner 
B 
of the land under the Act. 
T

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