Summary Security Force Court Lacks Jurisdiction Over Civil Offences Beyond Simple Hurt And Theft: High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh Vague Allegations Cannot Dissolve a Sacred Marital Relationship: Karnataka High Court Upholds Dismissal of Divorce Petition Daughters Entitled to Coparcenary Rights in Ancestral Property under Hindu Succession Act, 2005 Amendment: Madras High Court Divorce | False Allegations of Domestic Violence and Paternity Questions Amount to Mental Cruelty: Madhya Pradesh High Court Hostile Witness Testimony Admissible if Corroborated by Independent Evidence: Punjab and Haryana High Court Fraud Must Be Specifically Pleaded and Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt to Invalidate Registered Documents: Andhra Pradesh High Court Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Rash Driving Conviction But Grants Probation to First-Time Offender Bus Driver Orissa High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment for Husband Convicted of Wife's Murder Merit Cannot Be Sacrificed for Procedural Technicalities in NEET UG Admissions: Rajasthan High Court Patna High Court Upholds Partition Decrees: Unregistered Partition Deed Inadmissible, Fails to Prove Prior Partition - Joint Hindu Family Property Presumed Undivided: Patna High Court Section 195(1)(b) CrPC | Judicial Integrity Cannot Be Undermined: Supreme Court Restores Evidence Tampering Case In a NDPS Case Readiness and Willingness, Not Time, Decide Equity in Sale Agreements: Supreme Court Denies Specific Performance Prolonged Detention Violates Fundamental Rights Under Article 21: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail in Money Laundering Case DV ACT | Economic Abuse Includes Alienation of Assets, Necessitating Protection Orders: Allahabad High Court Illegal Structures to Face Demolition: Bombay HC Directs Strict Action Against Unauthorized Constructions Justice Must Extend to the Last Person Behind Bars: Supreme Court Pushes for Full Implementation of BNSS Section 479 to Relieve Undertrial Prisoners Efficiency Over Central Oversight: Supreme Court Asserts Need for Localized SIT in Chennai Case Partition, Not Injunction, Is Remedy for Joint Property Disputes: P&H High Court Dismisses Plea Subsequent Purchaser Can Question Plaintiff’s Intent: MP High Court Clarifies Specific Relief Act Trademark Pirates Face Legal Wrath: Delhi HC Enforces Radio Mirchi’s IP Rights Swiftly Madras High Court Upholds Extended Adjudication Period Under Customs Act Amid Allegations of Systemic Lapses Disputes Over Religious Office Will Be Consolidated for Efficient Adjudication, Holds Karnataka High Court Motive Alone, Without Corroborative Evidence, Insufficient for Conviction : High Court Acquits Accused in 1993 Murder Case Himachal Pradesh HC Criticizes State for Delays: Orders Timely Action on Employee Grievances Calls for Pragmatic Approach to Desertion and Cruelty in Divorce Cases: Calcutta High Court Orders Fresh Trial Juvenile Tried as Adult: Bombay High Court Validates JJB Decision, Modifies Sentence to 7 Years

Mutation of Property on Basis of Will Requires Civil Court Validation, Rules Madhya Pradesh High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The court emphasizes the necessity of resolving disputed facts and obtaining a civil court declaration for will-based property mutations.

The High Court of Madhya Pradesh, presided over by Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia, has dismissed a writ petition seeking the mutation of property based on a will. The court underscored the importance of resolving disputed facts and obtaining a declaration from a civil court to validate the will, thereby ensuring the proper transfer of property rights.

Varun Kumar Sonkar, a 25-year-old businessman from Jabalpur, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. He sought the court's intervention to have his name mutated in the revenue records for a property bequeathed to his late uncle, Dharmendra Sonkar, through a will executed by Phagulal Patel on June 28, 2012. Sonkar argued that since his uncle had died issueless, he was entitled to inherit the property based on the will. However, the petitioner’s father, Champalal Sonkar, is still alive, and no document of conveyance from Dharmendra Sonkar to the petitioner existed.

Disputed Facts:

The court highlighted two primary disputed facts:

The authenticity of the will executed by Phagulal Patel in favor of Dharmendra Sonkar.

Whether Dharmendra Sonkar died issueless.

Justice Ahluwalia noted that these disputes are substantial and require thorough examination by a competent civil court rather than a summary procedure.

Justice Ahluwalia referenced several key judgments that establish the legal framework for validating a will. He cited the Supreme Court's decisions, emphasizing that mutation of property based on a will does not confer title or ownership. Instead, such entries are meant for fiscal purposes only. The court cited the Supreme Court case of Jitendra Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh, reinforcing that "mutation of property in revenue records neither creates nor extinguishes title to the property nor has it any presumptive value on title"​​.

Justice Ahluwalia remarked, "The propounder of a will must prove the document in accordance with law. Sections 67 and 68 of the Evidence Act prescribe the requirements and nature of proof which must be satisfied by the party who relies on a document in a court of law." He further asserted, "The revenue authorities have no jurisdiction to decide the genuineness of a will; this can only be done by a civil court."

The court meticulously discussed the principles of evaluating the validity of a will, pointing out that the party propounding the will must demonstrate its authenticity and address any suspicious circumstances surrounding its execution. The judgment reiterated that the mere presence of a will does not automatically entitle the beneficiary to property rights without proper legal validation.

The High Court's dismissal of the petition underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring proper legal processes are followed in property disputes involving wills. By affirming the necessity of civil court declarations for will validation, the judgment reinforces the legal framework governing property transfers. This decision is expected to have significant implications for future cases, ensuring that property rights are not conferred based solely on revenue record entries without thorough judicial scrutiny.

 

Date of Decision: May 22, 2024

Varun Kumar Sonkar vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others

Similar News