35 Years After Land Sale, Karnataka HC Quashes Resumption Sought By Sale-Deed Party, Orders Petitioners’ Names Restored To Revenue Records

The land was granted in 1959 and sold in 1988.

Resumption proceedings were initiated before the Assistant Commissioner in 2023, nearly 35 years after the sale.

The Assistant Commissioner ordered resumption, and the Deputy Commissioner confirmed that order on appeal.

The applicants challenged both orders by writ petition.

The Court noted that respondent No. 5, Rangaiah, was a party to the sale deed.

In PTCL resumption proceedings, delay and laches are a primary consideration; restoration action brought after significant delay may be barred by laches, as stated by the Division Bench.

The Court also referred to Seethamma’s case for the proposition that a party to the sale deed could not initiate resumption proceedings.

The judgment does not identify a specific statutory provision or provide the full citation for either precedent.

The authorities ordered resumption without addressing that the sale had occurred in 1988 and proceedings were not initiated until 2023, despite the resulting rights having remained settled in the interim.

The Court held that this failure to consider delay and laches left a crucial issue unaddressed.

It also noted that Rangaiah, the applicant for resumption, was himself a party to the sale deed, bringing the proceedings within the principle attributed to Seethamma.

The orders therefore could not be sustained.

It directed the concerned authority to restore the petitioners’ name in the revenue records for the subject land.