Govind Singh vs Balveer Singh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3976 MP

                                                                         1
                                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
                                                                       BEFORE
                                                         HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
                                                               ON THE 23rd OF MARCH, 2022

                                                          WRIT PETITION No. 6037 of 2022

                                             Between:-
                                             GOVIND SINGH S/O RAMPRASAD , AGED ABOUT
                                             58   YEARS, OCCUPATION: FARMER VILLAGE
                                             PIPLYA KHALSA, TAHSIL REHTI (MADHYA
                                             PRADESH)

                                                                                                         .....PETITIONER
                                             (BY SHRI MUKESH KUMAR MISHRA, ADVOCATE )

                                             AND

                                    1.       BALVEER SINGH S/O RAMPRASAD SINGH , AGED
                                             ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NIL VILLAGE
                                             PIPLYA KHALSA, TEHSIL REHTI (MADHYA
                                             PRADESH)

                                    2.       LOKENDRA SINGH S/O RAMPRASAD RAJPUT ,
                                             AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NILL R/O
                                             VILLAGE PIPLYA KHALSA, TEHSIL- REHTI,
                                             DISTRICT- SEHORE, M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                    3.       RAKESH S/O RAMPRASAD RAJPUT , AGED ABOUT
                                             43 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NILL VILLAGE PIPLYA
                                             KHALSA, TAHSIL REHTI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                    4.       PARVATI BAI W/O RAMPRASAD RAJPUT , AGED
                                             ABOUT 80 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NILL VILLAGE
                                             PIPLYA KHALSA, TAHSIL REHTI (MADHYA
                                             PRADESH)

                                                                                                      .....RESPONDENTS
                                             (NONE )

                                          T h is petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                                    following:
                                                                          ORDER

Present writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging the order dated 28.02.2022, Annexure P/1 passed by the Court of Additional Commissioner, Bhopal, whereby, an application filed by the petitioner under Section 52 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') seeking grant of stay has been rejected.

It is alleged that the respondents have filed an application under Section 109 Signature Not Verified SAN

& 110 of the Code for mutation with respect to land bearing Khasra Nos. Digitally signed by SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA

99/2/3/1/ka/1, 127/104 having an area 0.441 hectare, Khasra No.99/2/3/2/ka/2, Date: 2022.03.29 10:32:05 IST

127/104 having an area 0.040 hectare, Khasra No.99/2/3/3/ka/1, 127/104 having an area 0.284 hectare and Khasra No. 99/2/3/3/ka/2, 127/104 having an area 0.061 hectare before the Tahsildar on the basis of a judgment and decree passed by Additional District Judge, Sehore in their favour. Learned Tahsildar has allowed the

application. It is submitted that an appeal was preferred against the order passed by the Tahsildar dated 22.09.2021 before the Sub Divisional Officer and the same was also dismissed by the Sub Divisional Officer vide order dated 22.11.2021. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred a second appeal under Section 44 of the Code before the Additional Commissioner, Bhopal alongwith an application under Section 52 of the Code for grant of stay, but the application has been rejected by the Court of Additional Commissioner vide impugned order. It is submitted that the petitioner is remediless and learned Commissioner ought to have been stayed the proceedings of mutation till decision on the second appeal. The finding which have been recorded by the Additional Commissioner is that balance of convenience is not in favour of the petitioner, therefore, interim relief could not be extended.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length and perused the record. From a perusal of the record, it is apparently clear that an application for mutation has been filed on the basis of a judgment and decree passed in favour of the respondents by the Civil Court dated 15.07.2021. Mutation proceedings are always drawn up on the basis of registered sale deed or the judgment and decree. As the respondents are declared to be owner of the property in question, learned Tahsildar was duty bound to complete the mutation proceedings in pursuance to the ownership of the land being declared by the Civil Court. No illegality is committed by the Tahsildar. An appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order passed by the Tahsildar has been rejected by the Court of Sub Divisional Officer. By mutation right does not confer upon the parties. In such circumstances, no illegality has been committed by learned Additional Commissioner while rejecting the application under Section 52 of the Code. The petitioner could not demonstrate Signature Not Verified SAN by filing any document that the judgment and decree passed in favour of the Digitally signed by SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA respondents has been stayed by any superior forum. In such circumstances, no Date: 2022.03.29 10:32:05 IST

illegality has been committed by learned Additional Commissioner while rejecting the application. The petitioner may pursue the appeal pending before the Additional Commissioner.

The petition sans merits and is hereby dismissed.

(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE sj

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Date: 2022.03.29 10:32:05 IST