2008 (2) TMI 939 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the sale deed executed after the commencement of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978.
2. Interpretation of the term "Transfer" u/s 3(e) of the Act.
3. Applicability of Section 4 of the Act to the sale deed executed after the commencement of the Act.
4. Authority of the Assistant Commissioner to resume the granted land u/s 5 of the Act.

Summary:

Issue 1: Validity of the Sale Deed Executed After the Commencement of the Act
The Supreme Court examined whether the sale deed executed and registered on 13th October 1986, after the commencement of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978, was valid. The Court held that the sale deed was null and void as it was executed without the previous permission of the government, in violation of Section 4(2) of the Act. The Court emphasized that any transfer of granted land made after the commencement of the Act without prior government permission is prohibited and thus invalid.

Issue 2: Interpretation of the Term "Transfer" u/s 3(e) of the Act
The Court interpreted the term "Transfer" as defined u/s 3(e) of the Act, which includes an agreement for sale. The Court noted that although under the general law, an agreement for sale does not transfer the title of the property, the Act specifically includes such agreements within the definition of "Transfer" to protect the rights of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The Court highlighted that this inclusive definition aims to prevent exploitation of these communities by affluent and powerful sections of society.

Issue 3: Applicability of Section 4 of the Act to the Sale Deed Executed After the Commencement of the Act
The Court analyzed Section 4 of the Act, which prohibits the transfer of granted lands. It held that any transfer of granted land, either before or after the commencement of the Act, in contravention of the terms of the grant or without prior government permission, is null and void. The Court concluded that since the sale deed in question was executed after the commencement of the Act without government permission, it was invalid under Section 4.

Issue 4: Authority of the Assistant Commissioner to Resume the Granted Land u/s 5 of the Act
The Court affirmed the authority of the Assistant Commissioner u/s 5 of the Act to initiate proceedings for resumption of granted land if the transfer is found to be null and void under Section 4. The Court upheld the Assistant Commissioner's order to resume the land and restore it to the original grantee or his heirs, emphasizing the legislative intent to protect the rights of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the orders of the Assistant Commissioner, the appellate authority, and the High Court. The Court reiterated that the sale deed executed after the commencement of the Act without prior government permission was null and void, and the land must be restored to the original grantee or his heirs. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.