Buyer’s Name Restored in Land Records After Karnataka HC Quashes Heir’s PTCL Resumption Orders Over 10-Year Delay

The subject land, originally in unauthorised occupation, was regularised by an Official Memorandum dated 18 August 1978. The original grantee subsequently conveyed it to the petitioner by registered sale deed dated 12 October 2004.

In 2014, a person claiming to be the original grantee’s legal heir initiated resumption proceedings under the PTCL Act. The Assistant Commissioner ordered resumption on 7 February 2018, and the Deputy Commissioner affirmed that order on 6 March 2025.

The Court applied the PTCL Act, observing that its resumption provisions could be invoked only after establishing that the land fell within the Act’s ambit.

It also applied the principles of delay and laches, stating that authorities must consider whether delayed restoration proceedings can be sustained and referring to a Division Bench’s clarification that laches is a primary consideration in resumption proceedings and that substantial delay may bar restoration action.

The Assistant Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner directed resumption without addressing the petitioner’s contention that proceedings had begun nearly ten years after the registered sale, or determining whether that delay was reasonable and explained.

The Court also noted that the land had been regularised and held that the authorities could not sustain resumption under the PTCL Act without first considering whether the land was covered by the Act. Given these unaddressed material questions, the impugned orders could not stand.

It directed the concerned authority to mutate or restore the petitioner’s name in the revenue records relating to the subject land.