Gujarat High Court quashes land-sale orders after new law regularises transfers made before March 31, 2026

The petitioners challenged orders declaring void a registered sale deed dated 15 May 2007 for land at Mouje Raska, Kheda, on the ground that the transaction violated the Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947.

The Deputy Collector’s order of 13 May 2015 was affirmed by the Special Secretary, Revenue Department (Appeals), on 27 February 2017.

The petitioner also relied on a 2026 amendment inserting Section 9(4) into the Act, which deemed certain transfers made between 29 January 1948 and 31 March 2026 regularised.

A civil suit brought by respondent No. 3 seeking to invalidate the sale deed was rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d), and the appeal from that order was dismissed for default.

1. Whether the petitioner’s 2007 sale transaction was deemed regularised under Section 9(4) of the Act, notwithstanding the orders declaring it void for breach of the Act.

2. Whether the impugned orders should therefore be quashed and set aside.

Section 9(4) of the Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947, as amended, provides that a transfer or partition contrary to the Act, made on or after 29 January 1948 and on or before 31 March 2026, is deemed regularised without penalty or premium; pending proceedings before an officer or authority concerning such transfer or partition abate.

The impugned authorities had treated the sale deed as void for alleged violations of Sections 7, 8 and 31 of the Act.

The Court also exercised its jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.

The sale deed was executed in 2007, within the period specified in Section 9(4), and the Court therefore held that the transfer was deemed regularised without penalty or premium.

Although the provision also abates pending proceedings, the Court observed that no such proceedings remained pending before an authority in this case; the relevant consequence was the statutory regularisation of the transfer, notwithstanding the earlier cancellation of the revenue entry for want of prior permission.

It quashed and set aside the SSRD’s order dated 27 February 2017 and the Deputy Collector’s order dated 13 May 2015; the Rule was made absolute.