Land Belonging To Adivasi Can't Be Transferred Without Permission From Concerned Authority: Bombay HC Finds Lease To Be Sham
The Bombay High Court was considering a Petition whereby the petitioners sought quashing of the order passed by the Additional Divisional Commissioner.
Justice A.S. Gadkari, Justice Kamal Khata, Bombay High Court
Finding a property transaction to be a sham, the Bombay High Court has held that it is impermissible to transfer land belonging to Adivasi without permission from the concerned authority.
The Court also held that a mere notarised document bearing only a thumb impression for allegedly taking the property on lease for a period of 99 years has no evidentiary value.
The High Court was considering a Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution whereby the petitioners sought quashing and setting aside the Order passed by the Additional Divisional Commissioner.
The Division Bench of Justice Kamal Khata and Justice A.S. Gadkari held, “The entire transaction appears to be a sham. The Agreement on the record is merely a notarized document having no evidentiary value. The claim that consideration of Rs.90,000/- was paid in cash is false. The document merely records that the Respondent No.1 acknowledges having Rs.90,000/- “from time to time”; no receipt evidencing any such payment has been produced, and no consideration is shown to have in fact been paid by the Petitioner for alleged lease of 99 years. The document bears a thumb impression purportedly of Respondent No. 1. Save for the bald assertions, there is no other document substantiating the rights of the Petitioners in the subject property.”
Advocate Nikhil M. Pujari represented the Petitioner while Additional Govt Advocate Nisha Mehra represented the Respondent-State.
Factual Background
The case as set up by the Petitioner was that the property is the ancestral property of both the Petitioners and the Respondents. The Petitioners had entered into an Agreement with the respondent taking the property on lease for a period of 99 years for a total consideration of Rs 90,000. As per the Petitioner, despite having received the entire consideration, the Respondents, without the Petitioners’ knowledge, got the Petitioners’ names deleted from the Record of Rights and retained only their names. The Respondents had challenged the Mutation Entry which stood in the name of the Petitioners, but the said Appeal was dismissed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, thereby confirming the Mutation Entries.
The respondents then instituted a case before the Tahsildar, and an Order favouring the Respondents came to be passed, thereby leading the Petitioners to file the petition.
Reasoning
On a perusal of the facts of the case, the Bench noted that the entire transaction appeared to be a sham as the Agreement on the record was merely a notarized document having no evidentiary value. The Bench also found the claim that consideration of Rs.90,000 was paid in cash to be false. Finding no document substantiating the rights of the Petitioners in the subject property, the Bench upheld the order passed by the Additional Divisional Commissioner, Nashik Division, Nashik.
“A plain reading shows that it was passed after hearing both the parties and considering their respective contentions in their entirety. Importantly, it rightly records that the land belonging to Respondent No. 1 an Adivasi was sought to be transferred without requisite permission from the concerned authority; that is impermissible. We find that the conclusion arrived is duly justified”, it stated while dismissing the petition and also dismissing the Revision Application filed by the Petitioners.
Cause Title: Suka Mahadu Khade v. Bababai Tukaram Shevre (Case No.: Writ Petition No. 7542 of 2026)