RAMILABEN KIRTIKUMAR SHAH vs STATE OF GUJARAT
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
C/SCA/7347/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2026
(GJHC240477372017)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7347 of 2017
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
RAMILABEN KIRTIKUMAR SHAH & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
A B PATEL(7467) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,1.1,1.2,1.3
MR NIKUNJ KANARA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
MR VAIBHAV A VYAS(2896) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 4
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 09/10/2026
JUDGMENT
1. The present petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, 1950 by the petitioners praying for the
following reliefs:
“(A) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an
appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of
writ of mandamus by quashing and setting aside the
impugned judgment and order dated 27/02/2017 at
"ANNEXURE-A" passed by Ld. Principal Special
Secretary Revenue Department (Appeals),
Ahmedabad bearing no. M.V.V./KON/KHD/10/2015
and impugned judgment and order dated 13/05/2015
at "ANNEXURE-C" passed by Ld. Deputy Collector,
Kheda in CON CASE No. 18 of 2011.
(B) Pending admission, hearing & final disposal of
this petition, This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to
stay the implementation, execution & operation of the
impugned order dated 27/02/2017 at "ANNEXURE-
Page 1 of 8
Uploaded by MUSKAN AJAY MENON(HC02359) on Thu Oct 15 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 16 01:06:30 IST 2026
C/SCA/7347/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2026
(GJHC240477372017)
A" passed by Ld. Principal Special Secretary
Revenue Department (Appeals), Ahmedabad bearing
no. M.V.V./ΚΟΝ/ΚHD/10/2015 and impugned
judgment and order dated 13/05/2015 at
"ANNEXURE-C" passed by Ld. Deputy Collector,
Kheda in CON CASE No. 18 of 2011.
(C) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an
appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of
writ of mandamus by directing respondent authorities
to enter the name of the petitioner in the revenue
records of the subject land.
(D) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to pass such
other further relief in favor of the petitioner as
deemed just and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case.”
2. Heard learned advocate Mr. A.B. Patel for the petitioner,
learned AGP Mr. Nikunj Kanara for the respondent – State and
learned advocate Mr. Vaibhav Vyas for respondent No. 3. Though
served, none appeared for respondent No. 4.
3. Brief facts of the case are as follows:
3.1 The petitioner claims to be the owner of land bearing
Block/Survey No. 839 paiki 2, admeasuring 3,642 sq. mtrs.
(0-36-42 Hec-Are-Sq.mtrs), situated at Mouje – Raska,
Taluka – Mahemdavad, District – Kheda. The petitioner also
holds the adjoining parcel of land bearing Block/Survey No.
839 paiki 1, admeasuring 0-24-28 Hec-Are-Sq.mtrs. The
aforesaid lands originally belonged to respondent Nos. 3 and
4, who partitioned the land bearing Block/Survey No. 839,
admeasuring 0-88-02 Hec-Are-Sq.mtrs, amongst themselves
Page 2 of 8
Uploaded by MUSKAN AJAY MENON(HC02359) on Thu Oct 15 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 16 01:06:30 IST 2026
C/SCA/7347/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2026
(GJHC240477372017)
by way of a family partition dated 08.01.2005, which came to
be recorded vide Mutation Entry No. 1564. Thereafter,
respondent No. 4 herein, executed a registered sale deed
dated 15.05.2007 in favour of the petitioner in respect of land
bearing Block/Survey No. 839 paiki 2, admeasuring 0-36-42
Hec-Are-Sq.mtrs. Pursuant thereto, Mutation Entry No. 1857
came to be recorded in the revenue records in favour of the
petitioner on 31.05.2007. On 01.03.2011, respondent No. 3
initiated proceedings before the learned Deputy Collector,
Kheda, by filing an application, seeking a declaration that the
aforesaid sale transaction was void under Sections 9 and 31
of the Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and
Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to
as “the Act” ). Learned Deputy Collector, Kheda, vide order
dated 13.05.2015, decided the proceedings against the
petitioner. Being aggrieved, the petitioner preferred a
revision application before the learned Special Secretary,
Revenue Department (Appeals), Gujarat State (hereinafter
referred to as “the SSRD” ), which came to be rejected vide
order dated 27.02.2017, thereby confirming the order dated
13.05.2015 passed by the learned Deputy Collector, Kheda.
Page 3 of 8
Uploaded by MUSKAN AJAY MENON(HC02359) on Thu Oct 15 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 16 01:06:30 IST 2026
C/SCA/7347/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2026
(GJHC240477372017)
Respondent No. 3 instituted Regular Civil Suit No. 90 of
2015 before the learned Principal Civil Judge, Mehmdabad,
on 19.10.2015, seeking a declaration that the sale deed was
null and void ab initio , along with consequential reliefs of
cancellation of sale deed and permanent injunction against
the petitioner and respondent No. 4. The plaint came to be
rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 vide order dated 28.06.2017. Respondent
No. 3 challenged the said judgment and order by preferring
Regular Civil Appeal No. 67 of 2017 before the learned
Principal District Judge, Kheda, at Nadiad. However, the said
appeal came to be dismissed for default on 29.03.2023.
3.2 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated
27.02.2017 passed by the learned SSRD, the petitioner is
before this Court by way of the present petition.
4. Learned advocate for the petitioner, at the outset, has placed
reliance upon the Government Ordinance No. 2/2026 passed by
the Revenue Department, Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar, dated
14.07.2026 and contended that by amending Section 9 of the
Gujarat Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of
Page 4 of 8
Uploaded by MUSKAN AJAY MENON(HC02359) on Thu Oct 15 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 16 01:06:30 IST 2026
C/SCA/7347/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2026
(GJHC240477372017)
Holdings Act, 1947 (hereinafter, referred to as “the Act” ), any
transfer or partition of a land contrary to the provisions of the Act
made on or after 29.01.1948 but on or before 31.03.2026 shall be
deemed to have been regularized without charging any penalties
or premium and all pending proceedings before any authority shall
abate. It is therefore, submitted that in view of aforesaid
amendment in the Act, the present petition deserves to be allowed
by quashing and setting aside the order dated 27.02.2017 passed
by the learned SSRD in Revision Application
No.MVV/KON/KHD/10/2015 and order dated 13.05.2015 passed
by the learned Deputy Collector, Kheda in Con Case No. 18 of
2011. Except above, no other submissions were made by learned
advocate for the petitioner.
5. Per contra, learned AGP for the respondent – State could not
contradict the aforesaid facts and contended that Sub-Section(4)
has been inserted in Section 9 of the Act. Except above, no other
submissions were made by learned AGP for the respondent –
State.
6. Having considered the submissions made by learned
advocates for the parties and upon perusal of the papers placed
Page 5 of 8
Uploaded by MUSKAN AJAY MENON(HC02359) on Thu Oct 15 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 16 01:06:30 IST 2026
C/SCA/7347/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2026
(GJHC240477372017)
on record, it appears that the challenge in the present petition is
against the order dated 27.02.2017 passed by the learned SSRD
whereby the Revision Application filed by the petitioner came to be
rejected by confirming the order dated 13.05.2015 passed by the
learned Deputy Collector, Kheda. The petitioner, having a
registered sale deed dated 15.05.2007 in respect of the land in
question, had the sale deed entry mutated in the revenue records
on 31.05.2007 vide Entry No. 1857. The learned Deputy Collector,
Kheda, vide order dated 13.05.2015, declared the registered sale
deed dated 15.05.2007 void as the sale transaction was in
violation of Sections 7, 8 and 31 of the Act, 1947. Learned SSRD
also affirmed the finding of learned Deputy Collector and rejected
the Revision Application of petitioner.
7. Sub-section(4) has been inserted in Section 9 of the Act.
Sub-section (4) of the Act is reproduced hereunder:
"(4) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, a
transfer or partition of a land contrary to the
provisions of this Act made on or after the 29th
January, 1948 but on or before 31st March, 2026
shall be deemed to have been regularised without
charging any penalties or premium therefor and all
pending proceedings before any officer or authority in
respect of the aforesaid transfer or partition shall
abate.".
Page 6 of 8
Uploaded by MUSKAN AJAY MENON(HC02359) on Thu Oct 15 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 16 01:06:30 IST 2026
C/SCA/7347/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2026
(GJHC240477372017)
8. The provision mandates that any transfer of land which was
contrary to the provisions of the Act made on or after 29.01.1948
but on or before 31.03.2026 shall be deemed to have been
regularized without charging any penalties or premium and all
pending proceedings before any Officer or Authority in respect of a
transfer shall stand abated. In view of aforesaid provision of law,
the sale deed is indisputably falling within the aforesaid two dates
of 29.01.1948 and 31.03.2026. Therefore, the transfer of land is
deemed to have been regularized without charging any penalties
or premium.
9. It also appears from the record that no proceedings are
pending before any authority dealing with the question of breach of
provisions of the Act, and therefore, the question of abatement of
such proceedings do not arise in the present case. In the present
case, the entry of sale deed was cancelled on the ground of the
sale being violative of the provisions of the Act as there was no
prior permission obtained by the private parties before entering
into a transaction of sale.
10. In view of the aforesaid amended provision, the present
petition deserves to be allowed and the same is hereby allowed.
Page 7 of 8
Uploaded by MUSKAN AJAY MENON(HC02359) on Thu Oct 15 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 16 01:06:30 IST 2026
C/SCA/7347/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/10/2026
(GJHC240477372017)
The order dated 27.02.2017 passed by the learned SSRD in
Revision Application No.MVV/KON/KHD/10/2015 and order dated
13.05.2015 passed by the learned Deputy Collector, Kheda in
CON Case No. 18 of 2011 are, hereby quashed and set aside.
Rule is made absolute accordingly.
(D. M. DESAI,J)
MUSKAN
Page 8 of 8
Uploaded by MUSKAN AJAY MENON(HC02359) on Thu Oct 15 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 16 01:06:30 IST 2026