High Court of Bombay at Goa Quashes Deputy Collector's Order in Land Record Correction Case — Section 103 of Goa Land Revenue Code Cannot Be Used for Adjudication of Title Disputes. The Deputy Collector's order deleting the name of the predecessor-in-title and substituting the respondent's name was held to be beyond the scope of clerical error correction under Section 103 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Land Revenue Code, 1968.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Accused
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, legal heirs of Joseph Paulo, challenged an order dated 24.01.1995 passed by the Deputy Collector under Section 103 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Land Revenue Code, 1968, which deleted the name of Joseph Paulo from the record of rights of survey nos.43/8 and 44/2 at Parra, Bardez, and substituted the name of the respondent, Maria Corinta Noronha e Fernandes. The respondent had filed an application in 1993 claiming that the name of Joseph Paulo was wrongly recorded and sought correction as a clerical error. The Deputy Collector, after issuing notice by publication, passed the impugned order. The petitioners contended that the Deputy Collector exceeded his jurisdiction under Section 103, which only permits correction of clerical errors, not adjudication of title disputes. The High Court agreed, holding that the provision is limited to correcting clerical or arithmetical mistakes apparent on the face of the record, and cannot be used to determine rights where there is a serious dispute regarding title. The court quashed the Deputy Collector's order and set aside the same, leaving it open to the respondent to seek appropriate remedy before a civil court.

Headnote

A) Land Revenue - Correction of Clerical Errors - Section 103 Goa, Daman and Diu Land Revenue Code, 1968 - Scope of Power - The Deputy Collector's order deleting the name of the predecessor-in-title and substituting the respondent's name was held to be beyond the scope of clerical error correction under Section 103, as the provision only permits correction of clerical or arithmetical mistakes apparent on the face of the record, not adjudication of title disputes. (Paras 2, 6-8)

B) Land Revenue - Record of Rights - Section 103 Goa, Daman and Diu Land Revenue Code, 1968 - Title Dispute - The proceeding under Section 103 cannot be used to determine rights of parties where there is a serious dispute regarding title, as such disputes must be resolved by a civil court. The Deputy Collector's order was quashed and set aside. (Paras 6-8)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

What is the true scope of the power and jurisdiction of the Collector under Section 103 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Land Revenue Code, 1968, in the context of correcting errors in the record of rights or registers maintained under Chapter VIII of the said Code?

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed and set aside the order dated 24.01.1995 passed by the Deputy Collector, and left it open to the respondent to seek appropriate remedy before a civil court.

Law Points

  • Section 103 of Goa
  • Daman and Diu Land Revenue Code
  • 1968
  • correction of clerical errors
  • scope of power of Collector
  • record of rights
  • title dispute
  • summary proceedings
  • civil suit remedy
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (BOM) (02) 22

WRIT PETITION NO.63 OF 2020

2022-02-16

Manish Pitale

2022:BHC-GOA:182

Mr. Valmiki Menezes for the Petitioners, Mr. J.A. Lobo for the Respondent

Mrs. Maria Thereza de Jesus alias Anne Fernandes, Mrs. Valentina Carmelina Pauline Fernandes alias Carmen Fernandes, Mr. Angelo Caetano Fernandes, Juliana Fernandes, William Peter Fernandes, Mark Fernandes alias Albertine Fernandes

Maria Corinta Noronha e Fernandes

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging the order of the Deputy Collector under Section 103 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Land Revenue Code, 1968, deleting the name of the predecessor-in-title from the record of rights and substituting the respondent's name.

Remedy Sought

The petitioners sought quashing of the Deputy Collector's order dated 24.01.1995 and restoration of the record of rights as it stood prior to the order.

Filing Reason

The respondent filed an application under Section 103 in 1993 claiming that the name of Joseph Paulo was wrongly recorded in the record of rights of survey nos.43/8 and 44/2 at Parra, Bardez, and sought deletion of his name and addition of her name.

Previous Decisions

The Deputy Collector passed the impugned order on 24.01.1995, which was challenged by the petitioners in the present writ petition.

Issues

Whether the Deputy Collector had jurisdiction under Section 103 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Land Revenue Code, 1968, to delete the name of the predecessor-in-title and substitute the respondent's name in the record of rights, given that the provision only permits correction of clerical errors.

Submissions/Arguments

The petitioners argued that Section 103 only permits correction of clerical or arithmetical mistakes apparent on the face of the record, and the Deputy Collector exceeded his jurisdiction by adjudicating a title dispute. The respondent contended that the Deputy Collector's order was within the scope of Section 103 as it corrected an error in the record of rights.

Ratio Decidendi

Section 103 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Land Revenue Code, 1968, is limited to correction of clerical or arithmetical mistakes apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to adjudicate title disputes or determine rights of parties, which must be resolved by a civil court.

Judgment Excerpts

The principal question raised on behalf of the petitioners is, as to what is the true scope of the power and jurisdiction of the Collector under Section 103 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Land Revenue Code, 1968, in the context of correcting errors in the record of rights or registers maintained under Chapter VIII of the said Code. The Deputy Collector passed the impugned order exercising power, ostensibly under Section 103 of the said Code. The provision only permits correction of clerical or arithmetical mistakes apparent on the face of the record, not adjudication of title disputes.

Procedural History

The respondent filed an application under Section 103 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Land Revenue Code, 1968, in 1993 before the Deputy Collector. The Deputy Collector issued notice to Joseph Paulo, who had expired, and permitted service by publication. After hearings from 27.04.1993 to 24.11.1994, the Deputy Collector passed the impugned order on 24.01.1995. The petitioners filed the present writ petition challenging that order.

Acts & Sections

  • Goa, Daman and Diu Land Revenue Code, 1968: 103
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Bombay at Goa Quashes Deputy Collector's Order in Land Record Correction Case — Section 103 of Goa Land Revenue Code Cannot Be Used for Adjudication of Title Disputes. The Deputy Collector's order deleting the name of the predecessor-...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Chapter Proceedings Against Social Workers for Lack of Material — Notices Under Sections 110(e)(g) and 111 CrPC Set Aside as Based on Stale and Acquitted Cases Without Proximate Connection to Public Order