2014 (4) TMI 1263 - HC - Indian Laws

Documents determine title and ownership to land - title of goods - Sale of land - presumption of title to properties - eviction proceedings - What documents constitute title for lands? - HELD THAT - Under BSO-15 both assessed and unassessed lands are available for assignment and the lands which are classified as poramboke and reserved lands -assessed and unassessed are not available for assignment. All arable lands are assessed. There may be cases where after assessment of land a ryot may have left it uncultivated for one or more Faslies. In such cases the lands are shown as waste in the records. However in the RSR the word waste is not generally used and it only contains a column whether the land is assessed or unassessed . In case of unassessed waste as assignment is permissible the entry in revenue record describing the land as unassessed waste cannot be treated as conclusive an assignment may have been made and not recorded or in the absence of such assignment the same may be under the cultivation of ryots. Therefore there cannot be a presumption that all waste lands assessed or unassessed continue to be vested in the Government. When a dispute in this regard arises such disputes need to be settled based on the patta if produced by the claimants and in its absence based on the relevant revenue record. Thus the assessed and unassessed waste lands do not fall within the expression of poramboke or reserved which are generally used for communal purposes. Para-4(ii) of BSO-15 prohibited assignment of various categories of lands. These lands are therefore vested in the Government and no one can claim right over the same unless there is evidence to show that these lands are subsequently converted into assessed waste lands and assignments have been granted. While there is a presumption that all porambokes and lands reserved for communal purposes vest in the Government no such presumption arises in respect of waste lands assessed or unassessed. Whether the entries in the revenue records constitute conclusive proof of title and if not whether they have evidentiary value in determination of title? - HELD THAT - The following record could be held to constitute the core revenue record in Andhra area prior to the integration of the revenue record of both areas Diglot or A-Register Ledger/Chitta constituting settlement record No. 2 Account otherwise known as Adangal/Annual Settlement of occupation and cultivation No. 3 Account which reflects changes in respect of land held by way of transfer by sale relinquishment etc. and the Register of Holdings maintained under BSO-31 and No. 10 Account which is an individual chitta or personal ledger of each cultivator - In Telangana area Sethwar Register Supplementary Sethwar Wasool Baqui Register Khasra Pahani (prepared under the Land Census 1954 under the provisions of the A.P. (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 1950) Pahani Chowfasla and Faisal Patti constitute the core revenue record. Whether multiple registered sale transactions reflecting long standing possession give rise to a presumption of title to the property? - HELD THAT - The presumption envisaged under Section 6 of the 1971 Act is evidently based on the principle contained in Section 35 of the Evidence Act 1872 - Whether the entries in Resurvey and Resettlement Register (RSR) and Town Survey Land Register (TSLR) are conclusive in determining title? - HELD THAT - The entry in the TSLR does not constitute conclusive proof of one s title. Whether eviction proceedings under the 1905 Act can be initiated when there is a bonafide title dispute? - HELD THAT - The settled legal position therefore emanating from the above noted Judgments is that where there is a bonafide dispute regarding title of a person over the lands other than public roads streets bridges or the bed of the sea or the like summary proceedings under the 1905 Act cannot be initiated and that in all such cases the Government which claims title shall approach the competent Civil Court for declaring its title. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. What documents determine title and ownership to land?
2. Whether entries in revenue records constitute conclusive proof of title and their evidentiary value.
3. Whether multiple registered sale transactions reflecting long-standing possession give rise to a presumption of title.
4. Whether entries in the Resurvey and Resettlement Register (RSR) and Town Survey Land Register (TSLR) are conclusive in determining title.
5. Whether eviction proceedings under the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905 can be initiated when there is a bona fide title dispute.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Documents Determining Title and Ownership to Land
- Patta: A patta granted under BSO-27 or Laoni Rules confers absolute title. Assignments made under BSO-15 prior to 18-6-1954 in Andhra Area and Laoni pattas before 25-7-1958 in Telangana Area confer absolute title with the right to transfer the land.
- Revenue Records: In the absence of patta, revenue records such as A-Register/Diglot, Ledger/Chitta in Andhra Area, and Sethwar, Supplementary Sethwar, and Wasool Baqui in Telangana Area form the basis for determining title. Post-1971, integrated village accounts like Printed Diglot or A-Register, Village Accounts No. 1, 2, 3, and 4 are relevant.
- Multiple Registered Sale Transactions: Long possession supported by multiple registered sale transactions gives rise to a presumption of title, which is rebuttable.

Issue 2: Entries in Revenue Records and Their Evidentiary Value
- Presumption of Correctness: Section 6 of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 creates a statutory presumption about the correctness of the entries in the record of rights.
- Judicial Precedents: The Supreme Court and various High Courts have held that entries in revenue records carry great evidentiary value but are not conclusive proof of title. They must be considered along with other evidence.
- Contradictory Entries: If an entry in the Adangal contradicts the basic record such as Diglot or RSR, the latter prevails. Adangal does not constitute the record of rights for a village.

Issue 3: Multiple Registered Sale Transactions
- Possession and Title: Possession lawfully obtained raises a presumption of ownership. Long possession is not only evidence of title but is a good and valid title by itself.
- Judicial Recognition: Courts have recognized that transactions by a party dealing with the property to which they lay a claim are important evidence of title and sometimes constitute the only evidence available.

Issue 4: Entries in RSR and TSLR
- RSR: RSR is not a stand-alone document and cannot be taken as conclusive proof of title. Entries showing land as Government land do not necessarily mean it is not patta land but only that it is not inam land. Blanks or dots in the pattadar column do not mean the land is vested in the Government.
- TSLR: Entries in TSLR are relevant but not conclusive. The Supreme Court has held that TSLR entries alone cannot be relied upon for proof of establishing title.

Issue 5: Eviction Proceedings under the 1905 Act
- Bona Fide Dispute: Where there is a bona fide dispute regarding the title of a person in possession of lands other than public roads, streets, bridges, or the bed of the sea, summary proceedings under the 1905 Act cannot be initiated. The Government must approach the competent Civil Court for declaration of its title.
- Judicial Precedents: The Supreme Court in Tummala Krishna Rao and subsequent judgments have held that summary eviction proceedings are not suitable for adjudicating complicated questions of title.

Conclusion:
The judgment comprehensively addresses the issues related to land title and ownership, emphasizing the importance of various documents and records while determining title. It highlights that while revenue records carry significant evidentiary value, they are not conclusive proof of title. Multiple registered sale transactions reflecting long-standing possession can give rise to a presumption of title, which is rebuttable. Entries in RSR and TSLR are not conclusive in determining title, and eviction proceedings under the 1905 Act cannot be initiated in cases of bona fide title disputes. The judgment provides a detailed analysis of the legal principles governing land ownership and the evidentiary value of various records, offering clear guidance on resolving such disputes.