Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2021 (9) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (9) TMI 1506 - SUPREME COURTDispute regarding mutation entry in revenue records set aside - remedy available to Petitioner who is claiming rights/title on the basis of the will executed by the deceased Ananti Bai, once the will is disputed - HELD THAT:- It cannot be disputed that the right on the basis of the will can be claimed only after the death of the executant of the will. Even the will itself has been disputed. Be that as it may, as per the settled proposition of law, mutation entry does not confer any right, title or interest in favour of the person and the mutation entry in the revenue record is only for the fiscal purpose. As per the settled proposition of law, if there is any dispute with respect to the title and more particularly when the mutation entry is sought to be made on the basis of the will, the party who is claiming title/right on the basis of the will has to approach the appropriate civil court/court and get his rights crystallized and only thereafter on the basis of the decision before the civil court necessary mutation entry can be made. Right from 1997, the law is very clear. In the case of Balwant Singh v. Daulat Singh (D) by Lrs. [1997 (7) TMI 692 - SUPREME COURT], this Court had an occasion to consider the effect of mutation and it is observed and held that mutation of property in revenue records neither creates nor extinguishes title to the property nor has it any presumptive value on title. Such entries are relevant only for the purpose of collecting land revenue. Similar view has been expressed in the series of decisions thereafter. In the case of Suraj Bhan v. Financial Commissioner [2007 (4) TMI 778 - SUPREME COURT], it is observed and held by this Court that an entry in revenue records does not confer title on a person whose name appears in record-of-rights. Entries in the revenue records or jamabandi have only "fiscal purpose", i.e., payment of land revenue, and no ownership is conferred on the basis of such entries. It is further observed that so far as the title of the property is concerned, it can only be decided by a competent civil court. Thus, it cannot be said that the High Court has committed any error in setting aside the order passed by the revenue authorities directing to mutate the name of the Petitioner herein in the revenue records on the basis of the alleged will dated 20.05.1998 and relegating the Petitioner to approach the appropriate court to crystallize his rights on the basis of the alleged will dated 20.05.1998. SLP dismissed.
|