KANTIBHAI MATHURBHAI PATEL vs STATE OF GUJARAT
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
C/SCA/280/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/10/2026
(GJHC240764122018)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 280 of 2019
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI
=============================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
=============================================
KANTIBHAI MATHURBHAI PATEL & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
=============================================
Appearance:
MALAY S PATEL(8901) for the Petitioner(s) No. 2,3.1,3.2,3.3,3.4,3.5
UNSERVED EXPIRED (N) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS DEVANSHIBA RANA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR AMIT N CHAUDHARY(5599) for the Respondent(s) No. 5.1,5.3
MR PS PATEL(643) for the Respondent(s) No. 5.2,6,7,8.1,8.2
MR. D. P. KINARIWALA(410) for the Respondent(s) No. 5.2,6,7,8.1,8.2
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 5,8
=============================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI
Date : 29/10/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Malay S. Patel appearing for
the petitioners, learned advocate Mr.Amit N. Chaudhary
appearing for respondent Nos.5.1, 5.3, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, 10, 11,
12.1, 12.2, learned advocates Mr.P.S. Patel and Mr.D.P.
Kinariwala appearing for respondent Nos.5.2, 6, 7, 8.1, 8.2 and
learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent-
State.
2. By way of this petition, the petitioner had prayed for the
following reliefs:
Page 1 of 7
Uploaded by NEHA PRAJAPATI(HC01404) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 21:11:02 IST 2026
C/SCA/280/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/10/2026
(GJHC240764122018)
“A. YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to admit and allow this petition;
B. YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or a
writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or
direction by quashing and setting aside the impugned order:
i. At Annexure-A dated 30.10.2018 passed in Revision
Application No. MVV/HKP/SBR/51/2018. by Respondent no.1
Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department;
ii. At Annexure-B dated 16.05.2017 passed by the Ld.
Collector, Sabarkantha -Respondent no.3 in RTS Revision Case
No. 182 of 2016;
iii. At Annexure-C dated 20.10.2016 passed by the Ld. Dy.
Collector, Prantij, District- Sabarkantha -Respondent no.4 in RTS
Appeal Case No. 54 of 2016 in the interest of justice.
C. YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus, or
any other appropriate writ, directing the Respondent no. 1, 2, 3 and 4,
their employees, managers, officers, agents or servants to mutate and
certify the entry no. 1025 at Annexure-G in the name of the petitioners
in the Record of Rights in the interest of justice;
D. Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, YOUR
LORDSHIPS be pleased to stay the implementation, execution and
operation of order:
i. At Annexure-A dated 30.10.2018 passed in Revision
Application No. MVV/HKP/SBR/51/2018. by Respondent no.1
Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department;
ii. At Annexure-B dated 16.05.2017 passed by the Ld. Collector,
Sabarkantha- Respondent no.3 in RTS Revision Case No. 182 of
2016;
iii. At Annexure-C dated 20.10.2016 passed by the Ld. Dy.
Collector, Prantij, District- Sabarkantha -Respondent no.4 in RTS
Appeal Case No. 54 of 2016.
E. Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, YOUR
LORDSHIPS be pleased to direct the Respondents, their agents,
servants, or any other person acting on their behalf, not to disturb the
possession of the petitioners qua the lands in question in the present
petition.
F. Such other and further relief or relieves as may be deem fit, just and
proper, in the facts and circumstances of the case;
3. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition
are as under:
Page 2 of 7
Uploaded by NEHA PRAJAPATI(HC01404) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 21:11:02 IST 2026
C/SCA/280/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/10/2026
(GJHC240764122018)
3.1 The lands bearing Revenue Old Survey Nos.52, 73/1,
76/1, 76/4, 197/1, 197/2, 197/3, 106/2, 106/3, 47/3, 47/5, 57/1,
57/4, 57/6, 109/2, 58/2, and 58/3 (New Survey Nos. 5, 248,
236, 235, 147, 148, 151, 346, 345, 11, 12, 444, 446, 440, 337,
338, 429, and 430 of Village : Katpur, Taluka Prantij, District
Sabarkantha, are the lands in dispute.
3.2 Out of these survey numbers, the lands bearing Revenue
Old Survey Nos. 76/1, 47/5, 106/3, 197/2, and 109/2 (New
Survey Nos. 236, 12, 345, 148, 337, and 338) were held by
Mathurbhai Mohanbhai Patel and the remaining survey
numbers were jointly held by Mathurbhai Mohanbhai Patel and
Kishorbhai Mohanbhai Patel.
3.3 Kishorbhai Mohanbhai Patel passed away in the year
1965 and pursuant to his demise, the names of his legal heirs
namely Maniben, Babiben, and Surajben, were mutated in the
revenue records vide Entry No. 700, dated 02.04.1966.
3.4 In the year 1972, Mathurbhai Mohanbhai Patel passed
away, for which, Entry No. 770 was mutated on 25.04.1972
whereby, the names of his legal heirs namely Kantibhai,
Revabhai, Amrutben, Ishwarbhai, Ramabhai, Rashikbhai,
Madhuben, and Kokilaben, were mutated in the revenue
records.
3.5 Maniben, the daughter of Kishorbhai Mohanbhai Patel,
passed away in the year 1975. Thereafter, Babiben, Surajben,
Amrutben, Madhuben, and Kokilaben relinquished their rights
regarding the land in question in favour of the petitioners. For
Page 3 of 7
Uploaded by NEHA PRAJAPATI(HC01404) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 21:11:02 IST 2026
C/SCA/280/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/10/2026
(GJHC240764122018)
this purpose, Entry No. 1025 was recorded in the revenue
records on 15.10.1985 and was certified on 01.07.1986.
Against this entry, respondent Nos.5/1 to 5/3 preferred an
appeal under Rule 108(5) of the Bombay Land Revenue Rules
before the Deputy Collector, Sabarkantha, being Appeal No. 54
of 2016. The appeal was allowed vide order dated 15.10.1985
and Entry No. 1025 was quashed and set aside. The said order
was challenged before the Collector, however, the Collector
rejected the Revision Application on 16.05.2017. As that order
was confirmed by respondent No.1, the present petition has
been filed.
4. Regarding the procedure adopted for the mutation of
Entry No.1025, the respondents Nos. 5/1 to 5/3 preferred an
appeal under Rule 108(5) of the Bombay Land Revenue Rules
before the Deputy Collector, Sabarkantha, in Appeal No. 54 of
2016 after a delay of 30 years. The Deputy Collector, the
Collector, and the Special Secretary held that Maniben had
expired in 1975 and her legal heirs were not joined as parties
while conducting the proceedings for the mutation of Entry
No.1025.
5. At this stage, it is relevant to note that the respondent
Nos.5.2, 6, 7, 8.1, 8.2 and respondent Nos.9.1, 9.2, 9.3, 10, 11,
12.1, 12.2 have filed further affidavits, along with affidavits in
the Gujarati language, wherein, it is stated that the petitioners
and private respondents are family members. Therefore, with a
view to maintaining peace and harmony among family
members, they have decided to waive their objections against
Page 4 of 7
Uploaded by NEHA PRAJAPATI(HC01404) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 21:11:02 IST 2026
C/SCA/280/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/10/2026
(GJHC240764122018)
Entry No.1025 and have confirmed that they will not raise any
objections in the future.
5.1 Furthermore, respondent No.5.1 has filed further
affidavits, along with an affidavit in the Gujarati language,
stating that respondent No.5.1 has decided to waive objections
against Entry No.1025 subject to the clearance of the cheque
received from the petitioners. It is further stated that the
private respondents are family members and, with a view to
maintaining peace and harmony, they have decided to waive
their objections against Entry No.1025, while the petitioners
have assured that the cheque amount will be released in their
favour.
6. At this stage, an amicable settlement has been reached
between the petitioners and the respondents, with the
exception of respondent No.5.3. A total of 13 respondents have
filed affidavits waiving objections against Entry No.1025,
excluding respondent No.5.3. Notice was served to respondent
No.5.3, and Mr.J.V.Jappee appeared on their behalf but
subsequently filed a note for withdrawal. Consequently, the
Additional Registrar issued a Notice to respondent No.5.3 and
now, Mr.Amit N. Chaudhary have instructions to appear on
behalf of respondent No.5.3.
7. Since the issue involved in the present petition lies within
a narrow compass, according to Entry No.700, the name of
Maniben Kishorbhai was entered into the revenue records for
Survey Nos.52, 73/1, 76/4, 197/1, 197/3, 106/2, 47/3, 57/1,
57/4, 57/6, 58/2, 58/3 following the demise of Kishorbhai
Page 5 of 7
Uploaded by NEHA PRAJAPATI(HC01404) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 21:11:02 IST 2026
C/SCA/280/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/10/2026
(GJHC240764122018)
Mohanbhai Patel. Subsequently, Maniben Kishorbhai
Mohanbhai Patel passed away in 1975. Thereafter, Babiben,
Surajben, Amrutben, Madhuben, and Kokilaben relinquished
their rights to the land in question in favor of the petitioners.
To reflect this, Entry No.1025 was recorded in the revenue
records on 15.10.1985 and subsequently, certified on
01.07.1986.
8. The Deputy Collector, the Collector and the Special
Secretary held that Maniben had expired in 1975 and her legal
heirs were not joined as parties while conducting the
proceedings for the mutation of Entry No.1025. The District
Collector further observed that the lands bearing Revenue Old
Survey Nos.76/1, 47/5, 106/3, 197/2, and 109/2 (New Survey
Nos. 236, 12, 345, 148, 337, and 338) were exclusively held by
Mathurbhai Mohanbhai Patel whereas, the remaining lands
were jointly held by Mathurbhai Mohanbhai Patel and
Kishorbhai Mohanbhai Patel.
9. In view of the aforesaid facts and the settlement arrived
at between the parties, the name of respondent No.5.3,
Veenaben Bhagvanbhai Patel, being the legal heir of Maniben
Kishorbhai, shall be entered in the revenue records in respect
of Survey Nos.52, 73/1, 76/4, 197/1, 197/3, 106/2, 47/3, 57/1,
57/4, 57/6, 58/2 and 58/3. The petitioners have also agreed to
the aforesaid arrangement.
10. Needless to clarify that the mutation of an entry is strictly
for fiscal purposes, does not confer any right, title, or interest,
and such matters are required to be adjudicated upon by a
Page 6 of 7
Uploaded by NEHA PRAJAPATI(HC01404) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 21:11:02 IST 2026
C/SCA/280/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/10/2026
(GJHC240764122018)
civil court. It is settled law that an entry in the revenue records
neither creates nor extinguishes title and exists essentially for
fiscal purposes, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Sawarni v. Inder Kaur and Others, reported in (1996) 6
SCC 223.
11. In view of the consensus arrived at between the parties
and affidavit filed to that effect, the present petition stands
allowed by quashing and setting aside the impugned order
dated 30.10.2018 passed by respondent No.1, the order dated
16.05.2017 passed by the Collector, District -Sabarkantha, as
well as the order dated 20.10.2016 passed by the Deputy
Collector, Prantij, District- Sabarkantha. The Entry No. 1025
shall accordingly be restored in the revenue records, subject to
the direction that the name of respondent No.5.3, Veenaben
Bhagvanbhai Patel, being the legal heir of Maniben Kishorbhai,
shall be entered in the revenue records in respect of Survey
Nos.52, 73/1, 76/4, 197/1, 197/3, 106/2, 47/3, 57/1, 57/4, 57/6,
58/2 and 58/3.
(VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI,J)
NEHA
Page 7 of 7
Uploaded by NEHA PRAJAPATI(HC01404) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 21:11:02 IST 2026