Sangam Lall v. The Deputy Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] ...

WPA/237/2022 Sangam Lall ... Petitioner Vs.

The Deputy Commissioner ... Respondent Mr. Gopala Binnu Kumar ... for the petitioner Mr. V.D.Sivabalan ... for the respondents July 25, 2022 [SR] Item No.5 Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner, by a Will, has been conferred title in respect of the share of his deceased mother in respect of a joint property. Accordingly, the petitioner has sought for mutation of the mother's share in the name of the petitioner pursuant to such registered Will. It is argued that the said Will has not been challenged before any forum of law. Merely due to alleged pendency of certain suits, the Tehsildar has postponed the proceeding of the mutation initiated at the petitioner's behest till "dismissal" of the suit.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent- authorities submits that several suits are pending, as it reflected from the orders of the Tehsildar. As such, the Tehsildar did not think it prudent to grant mutation without the suit being decided first by the competent Civil Court.

In the present case, there is nothing on record to indicate that any interim order of restraint has been passed in any form by any competent Civil Court, sufficient to prevent the Tehsildar from granting mutation to the petitioner, of course, subject to the petitioner complying with due formalities of law. Rather, the plaint annexed to the present writ petition indicates that one of the suits is a partition suit where, incidentally, a declaration of share of the parties, including the petitioner and the private respondents, has been sought.

Moreover, as rightly submitted by the petitioner, the registered Will has not been challenged before any legal forum till date. Hence, there cannot be any impediment in the Tehsildar processing the application of the petitioner for mutation, upon giving adequate opportunity of hearing to all objectors. That apart, it is well-settled that grant of mutation does not confer, ipso facto, title on a person. It is always within the domain of the competent Civil Court to decide on the question of title and mutation, whether granted or refused, shall always abide by the result of any civil suit which may be pending regarding the property.

Hence, WPA/237/2022 is disposed of by directing the Tehsildar to hear out and decide the proceeding No.RC/672/2020, which is pending for mutation at the behest of the writ petitioner, upon giving adequate opportunity of hearing to all concerned, including the objectors and in accordance with

law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months from date.

It is, however made clear that the outcome of the mutation proceeding, either by grant or refusal of mutation to the petitioner, shall abide by the result of any decree, if passed by a competent Civil Court. Moreover, merely by virtue of mutation, the petitioner would not be entitled to claim any special right or equity in respect of the property, if not otherwise available to the petitioner in law.

No order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the respective parties upon compliance of usual formalities. ( Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J. )