TOLYA ETC. versus STATE OF M.P. & ANR. ETC.

Citation: [2014] 9 S.C.R. 435 · Decided: 22-08-2014 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: RANJAN GOGOI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2014] 9 S.C.R.. 435 
TOLYA ETC. 
V. 
STATE OF M.P. & ANR. ETC. 
(Civil Appeal No. 6471 of 2014) 
AUGUST 22, 2014 
[RANJAN GOGOi AND M.Y. EQBAL, JJ.] 
A 
B 
M.P. Land Revenue Code 1959 - ss. 158 and 250 -
Bhumiswami - Reinstatement of Bhumiswami improperly 
dispossessed - Held: Section 35 makes a provision for C 
allotment of surplus land declared under the Ceiling Act after 
vesting of the surplus land in the State - State shall allot the 
surplus land under "Bhumiswami right" to the persons 
mentioned thereunder in the order of priority- Under s. 158(3) 
persons have all right to deal with the property but such D 
Bhumiswami cannot transfer land so allotted to him within a 
period of ten years from the date of lease or allotment - On 
facts, surplus land was allotted by the State uls. 35 giving 
Bhumiswami right to the appellants in the year 1973 - Within 
two years the land was purchased by respondent by sale deed E 
- Appellants' case that sale was without consideration and 
respondent in connivance with the other persons managed to 
keep appellants out of possession - Prima facie, the sale 
deed alleged to have been executed by appellants in favour 
of the respondent is null and void and the same does not F 
confer any right, title or interest in favour of the respondent -
Thus, trial court and first appellate court rightly held that the 
sale deed said to have been e.xecuted by appellants in favour 
of respondent was null and void and was without consideration 
- High Court while setting aside the judgment did not consider G 
the provisions contained in the M.P. Revenue Code, thus, 
order by the High Court set aside and that of the trial court 
restored - M.P. Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960 -
S. 35. 
435 
H 
436 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 9 S.C.R. 
A 
In the year 1973, the State allotted surplus land to the 
appellant u/s. 35 of the M. P. Ceiling on Agricultural Lands 
Holdings Act, 1960 giving Bhumiswami Right. Two years 
later, the appellants sold the said land by sale deed dated 
4.7.1975 in favour of respondent No.2. Thereafter, in the 
B year 1979 on a complaint, the Collector proceeded to 
revise the allotment. The respondent filed a revision and 
the allotment of land in favour of the appellants and 
subsequent transfer to respondent No.2 was upheld. It 
was appellant's case that he was illegally dispossessed 
c of the land. Proceedings were initiated under Section 250 
of the Land Revenue Code, 1959 for restoration of the 
property in favour of the appellants and notice was also 
issued to the respondent to hand over the land to the 
appellants. The respondent filed suits for declaration of 
0 
ownership in respect of the said property. and the same 
was dismissed. Appeal thereagainst was also dismissed. 
The respondent then filed Second Appeal before the High 
Court which was allowed and the judgment and orders 
passed by the trial court and the appellate court were set 
aside. Hence the instant appeal. 
E 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HE!-D: 1.1. From a bare reading of Section 35 of the 
M.P. Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960, it is 
F 
manifestly clear that Section 35 makes a provision for 
allotment of surplus land declared under the Ceiling Act 
after vesting ·of the surplus land in the State. According to 
th~s provisi6n, the State shall allot the surplus land under 
"Bhumiswami right" to the persons mentioned thereunder 
G in the order of priority. First, the surplus land shall be 
allotted to agricultural labourers belonging to SC & ST 
and, thereafter, to other persons. "Bhumiswami Right" has 
not been defined in the Ceiling Act, 1960. Section 158 of 
the M.P. Land Revenue Code 1959 defines classes of 
tenure and Bhumiswami. Sub-section (3) of Section 158 
H 
TOLYA ETC. v. STATE OF M.P. 
437 
clearly provides that land allotted by the State to any 
A 
person giving 'Bhumiswami right' shall have all right to 
deal with the property. However, proviso mandates that 
such Bhumiswami shall not transfer land so allotted to him 
within a period of ten years from the date of lease or 
allotment. [Para 12, 13) [442-G-H; 444-D-E] 
B 
1.2. In the instant case, the land, which was declared 
surplus land, was allotted by the State in purported 
exercise of power under Section 35 of the said Act giving 
Bhumiswami right to the appellants. The said allotment C 
was made in the year 1973. Within two years from the date 
of the said allotment, the land was purchased by the 
respondent
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.