Unregistered Instrument Of Settlement And Evidence Of Possession Can Be Considered As Sufficient Proof Of Settlement In The Matters Of The Agricultural Lease: Jharkhand High Court

The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that settlements, akin to leases, must adhere to the registration requirements outlined in Section 17 of the Registration Act. Nevertheless, in cases concerning agricultural lease or settlement, an unregistered settlement document, coupled with evidence of possession, has been deemed adequate to establish the existence of a settlement agreement.

According to the petitioners' case, the land in question was initially recorded in the R.S. Record of Rights as Gair Mazarua Khas belonging to the former landlord. Subsequently, 1.60 acres of this land were settled in favor of the petitioner's father.

Upon the father's demise, the petitioner inherited the land and has since been paying rent to the former landlord. However, objections were raised under Section 83 of the C.N.T. Act during a recent survey operation. These objections were raised by the father of the opposing party, leading to the preparation of a banda parcha designating the plot to be recorded in the name of the State of Bihar.

Following this, an appeal was lodged with the commissioner's court, which upheld the decision made by the Charge Officer in the Survey Appeal. Dissatisfied with this outcome, the petitioners have filed the present petition.

Contentions of the Petitioner

The petitioner argued that even though the respondents did not submit rent receipts from the State of Bihar and the former landlord, the petitioners did provide them.

Contentions of the State

The state argued that both the knowledgeable Commissioner and the settlement Court had given ample chances to the Petitioner to present evidence supporting their claim to the suit property, citing Sada Patta and demonstrating continuous possession. However, the petitioners failed entirely to provide any convincing evidence regarding the ex-landlord's settlement of the land, submission of a return related to it, determination of rent, or registration of a jamabandi in their or their predecessor's name.

Observations of the court

The court observed that under Section 17 of the Registration Act, a settlement is classified as a type of lease and therefore requires registration. However, in cases involving agricultural leases or settlements, it has been established that an unregistered settlement document, when accompanied by proof of possession, suffices as valid documentation.

In citing the precedent of Mt. Ugni v. Chowa Mahto, Justice Gautam Kumar Choudhary observed, “Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of both sides, it is apparent that there is concurrent finding by the learned Commissioner as well as the charge officer, wherein their claim over the land in question has been denied for want of any evidence. It is settled position of law that the settlement is a form of lease which is required to be registered in terms of Section 17 of the Registration Act. However, where the matter involves agricultural lease/settlement, an unregistered instrument of settlement followed by evidence of possession, has been accepted to be sufficient proof of settlement”

Considering these factors, the court concluded that the challenged order was not unlawful, and dismissed the petition.

Appearance:

For the Petitioner : Mr. H.K. Mahato, Advocate, Ms. Ahalya Mahato, Advocate, Ms. Jyotsna Mahato, Advocate

For the State: Ms. Shalini Shahdeo, A.C. to S.C. (L&C)-I

Case No.: W.P.(C) No. 2188 of 2003

Case Title: Sahodar Mahto Vs The State of Jharkhand

LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 43

Click Here To Read / Download Judgement