Case Note & Summary
The petitioners purchased agricultural land from respondent no.2, who had himself purchased the same land from respondent no.3 via a registered sale deed dated 13.1.1981. Within months, respondent no.3 filed an application before the Agricultural Land Tribunal (ALT) under Section 63 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, alleging that respondent no.2 was neither an agriculturist nor an agricultural labourer and that the sale was made without prior permission of the Collector, thus void. The ALT conducted an inquiry, heard all parties including the petitioners, and by order dated 30.9.1985 declared the sale void and directed possession to be restored to respondent no.3. The petitioners challenged this order by way of a writ petition. The High Court held that the sale in favour of respondent no.2 was clearly in contravention of Section 63 of the Act, which requires prior permission of the Collector for transfer of agricultural land to a non-agriculturist. Such a sale is void ab initio and confers no title on the purchaser. Consequently, the subsequent sale to the petitioners, being derived from a void title, also fails. The court found no merit in the petitioners' claim of being bona fide purchasers, as the original sale itself was illegal. The writ petition was dismissed, and the ALT's order was upheld.
Headnote
A) Tenancy Law - Void Sale - Section 63 Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 - Transfer of agricultural land to non-agriculturist without prior permission of Collector is void ab initio - The ALT correctly declared the sale deed dated 13.1.1981 as void and ordered possession to be restored to the original owner - Held that subsequent purchasers cannot acquire any title from a void sale (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the sale of agricultural land by a non-agriculturist without prior permission of the Collector under Section 63 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 is void and whether the petitioners, as subsequent purchasers, can claim any rights as bona fide purchasers.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition and upheld the order of the Agricultural Land Tribunal dated 30.9.1985 declaring the sale void and directing possession to be restored to respondent no.3.
Law Points
- Section 63 of Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act
- 1948
- void sale
- bona fide purchaser
- prior permission of Collector
- agricultural land transfer
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (03) 172
Writ Petition No. 1998 of 1990
Mr.Prafulla B.Shah for Petitioners, Mr.A.H.Palekar AGP for Respondent No.1, None for Respondent no.2 though served, Mr.Thakur for heirs of respondent no.3 (absent)
Shri.Bhagwan Sudam Borhade and Shri.Parameshwar Sudam Borhade
The State of Maharashtra, Shri.Pandurang Mahadeo Rajguru, and Shri.Kisan Maruti Borhade (since deceased through his heirs)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the order of the Agricultural Land Tribunal (ALT) declaring sale of agricultural land void under Section 63 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought to quash the ALT order dated 30.9.1985 and to protect their purchase of the land.
Filing Reason
The ALT declared the sale of land by respondent no.3 to respondent no.2 as void because respondent no.2 was not an agriculturist and no prior permission of the Collector was obtained, and ordered possession to be restored to respondent no.3. The petitioners, who purchased the land from respondent no.2, challenged this order.
Previous Decisions
The Agricultural Land Tribunal (ALT) by order dated 30.9.1985 declared the sale deed dated 13.1.1981 as void and directed possession to be restored to respondent no.3.
Issues
Whether the sale of agricultural land by a non-agriculturist without prior permission of the Collector under Section 63 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 is void.
Whether the petitioners, as subsequent purchasers from the original purchaser, can claim any rights as bona fide purchasers.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that they were bona fide purchasers for value without notice of any defect.
Respondent no.3 contended that the sale to respondent no.2 was void for want of prior permission under Section 63 of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi
A sale of agricultural land to a non-agriculturist without prior permission of the Collector under Section 63 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 is void ab initio and confers no title on the purchaser. Subsequent purchasers from such a purchaser also acquire no title, as the original sale is void.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioners had purchased agricultural land located and to the extent as mentioned below from respondent no.2.
The ALT ordered an enquiry by issuing notices to all the concerned.
The sale in favour of respondent no.2 was clearly in contravention of Section 63 of the Act.
Procedural History
Respondent no.3 filed an application before the Agricultural Land Tribunal on 14.12.1981. The ALT conducted an inquiry and passed an order on 30.9.1985 declaring the sale void. The petitioners filed the present writ petition in 1990 challenging that order.
Acts & Sections
- Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948: 63
