Application For Mutation Of Entry In Revenue Record Does Not Create Encumbrance On Property: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court recently refused to initiate contempt proceedings against a party to property dispute, said to have wilfully disobeyed court's status quo order by making an application for before the concerned Revenue Authority for mutation of the entry in the revenue record, on the basis of the registered Sale Deed.The Bench comprising Justice Vipul Pancholi and Justice AP Thaker was...
The Gujarat High Court recently refused to initiate contempt proceedings against a party to property dispute, said to have wilfully disobeyed court's status quo order by making an application for before the concerned Revenue Authority for mutation of the entry in the revenue record, on the basis of the registered Sale Deed.
The Bench comprising Justice Vipul Pancholi and Justice AP Thaker was of the view that such an application does not breach status quo with regard to the title and the encumbrance of the suit property, in any manner. It said,
"Opponent has neither got the Suit property transferred nor is there any encumbrance created...Just because the opponent made an application for entering her name in the revenue record, it cannot be said that there is willful and intentional disobedience of the order of this Court."
Reliance was placed on Apex Court's pronouncement in 'Sulochana Chandrakant Galande Vs. Pune Municipal Transport And Ors', that an encumbrance must be a charge on the property and it must run with the property.
""Encumbrance" actually means the burden caused by an act or omission of man and not that created by nature. It means a burden or charge upon property or a claim or lien on the land. It means a legal liability on property. Thus, it constitutes a burden on the title which diminishes the value of the land. It may be a mortgage or a deed of trust or a lien of an easement. An encumbrance, thus, must be a charge on the property."
In the instant case, the Court said there does not appear to be any encumbrance on the Suit property and therefore, the contention raised by the Petitioner is misconceived.
The Petitioner had approached the Court under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 r/w Art 215 of the Constitution. The Applicant primarily contested that the High Court had passed an order in 2020 directing the Opponent to maintain status quo with regard to the title and encumbrance of the suit property and the same was violated by filing an application for mutation of entry in the revenue record.
The Opponent submitted that no encumbrance was created on the suit property as alleged. The application for mutation of entry was made basis the Execution Proceedings.
The High Court noted that no encumbrance was created on the property. Moreover, the Appellate Revenue authority had set aside the entry. Thus, ultimately, there was no wilful or intentional disobedience of the order of the High Court.
Case No.: C/MCA/827/2021
Case Title: VIMALABEN PRABHUNATH MISRA v/s KETAN CHANDRAVADAN SONI
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 360