K. Sriramachandra Murthy Raju and ors. Vs. the State of A.P., Rep. by the District Collector and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- - the mandal revenue officer, anandapuram mandal thereafter found that the petitioners have no landed property, and therefore, they are landless poor. however, on the question whether there is good faith in the purchases made by the petitioners, he held that the petitioners ought to have enquired in detail whether the lands are zirayati or assigned lands, and whether the sellers have title to the lands. under section 3(5) if the vendee being a landless poor person bonafide purchases assigned land, the sale shall not be affected. 4. the word 'good faith' occurring in section 3(5) of the act should be understood in the context whether there are bona fides in the transactions. unless the land is an assigned land, the consideration of good faith as a relevant factor does not arise.orderp. ramakrishnam raju, j.1. in this batch of writ petitions, common questions arise, and they can be conveniently disposed of by this common judgment.2. the petitioners in these writ petitions purchased small extents of land for valuable consideration situated in dukkavanipalem, hamlet of gambeeram village, anandapuram mandal, visakhapatnam district, in the year 1976 and ever since they are in possession and enjoyment of the same. while so, the tahsildar, bheemunipatnam served notices on the petitioners in the year 1980 stating that the lands purchased by the petitioners were assigned to harijans in the village and as the sales are contrary to act 9 of 1977, they are not valid. the petitioners filed writ petition nos. 11952, 11425, 11737, 11842, 11951 and 12282 of 1983, and the high court by a common order dated 29-12-1987 referred the matter back to the authorities to adjudicate on the aspect as provided under section 3(5) of act 9 of 1977 after giving due notice and opportunity to all the concerned. the mandal revenue officer, anandapuram mandal thereafter found that the petitioners have no landed property, and therefore, they are landless poor. however, on the question whether there is good faith in the purchases made by the petitioners, he held that the petitioners ought to have enquired in detail whether the lands are zirayati or assigned lands, and whether the sellers have title to the lands. he also observed that the sale consideration under the sale documents represent the prevailing market rate. questioning the said order, these writ petitions are filed.3. we have perused the records. as per the directions of this court in the earlier writ petition no. 11952 of 1983 and batch, the authorities are directed to find out whether section 3(5) of act 9 of 1977 is applicable to these transactions. under section 3(5) if the vendee being a landless poor person bonafide purchases assigned land, the sale shall not be affected. as already seen, the mandal revenue officer, anandapuram in the impugned order found that the petitioners are landless poor persons, but he observed that the sales are not in good faith since they have not made necessary enquiries which they ought to have made whether the lands are zirayati or assigned lands, and whether the vendors have title over the lands.4. the word 'good faith' occurring in section 3(5) of the act should be understood in the context whether there are bona fides in the transactions. in other words, the test should be whether the transaction is genuine, whether the sale consideration passed, whether possession was delivered, whether the transaction is not sham and nominal and is not benami, or a make-believe affair. the observation of the learned mandal revenue officer that the enquiry should relate to the fact whether such a land can be purchased does not arise as the exception applies only to such sales. unless the land is an assigned land, the consideration of good faith as a relevant factor does not arise. therefore, the enquiry relating to the fact whether the land is an assigned land or not cannot be a relevant consideration. the only consideration should be whether the transaction is genuine, and whether it is intended to be acted upon. in other words the transaction is for consideration and in all the respects true and honest. in our view the enquiry should relate to these aspects and not whether the land is zirayati, patta land or assigned land. as already seen the learned mandal revenue officer has found that the consideration under the sale deeds represents the market value. therefore, there is nothing to suspect the bona fides of the sales, nor there is any under-hand dealing in these transactions. therefore, we set-aside the impugned orders and hold that the sale transactions are saved by section 3(5) of a.p. assigned lands (prohibition of transfers) act.5. the writ petition nos. 3942; 4335; 4336; 4460; 4461; and 4462 of 1989 are accordingly allowed, but in the circumstances without costs.

Judgment:
ORDER

P. Ramakrishnam Raju, J.

1. In this batch of writ petitions, common questions arise, and they can be conveniently disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The petitioners in these writ petitions purchased small extents of land for valuable consideration situated in Dukkavanipalem, hamlet of Gambeeram Village, Anandapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, in the year 1976 and ever since they are in possession and enjoyment of the same. While so, the Tahsildar, Bheemunipatnam served notices on the petitioners in the year 1980 stating that the lands purchased by the petitioners were assigned to Harijans in the village and as the sales are contrary to Act 9 of 1977, they are not valid. The petitioners filed Writ Petition Nos. 11952, 11425, 11737, 11842, 11951 and 12282 of 1983, and the High Court by a common order dated 29-12-1987 referred the matter back to the authorities to adjudicate on the aspect as provided Under Section 3(5) of Act 9 of 1977 after giving due notice and opportunity to all the concerned. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Anandapuram Mandal thereafter found that the petitioners have no landed property, and therefore, they are landless poor. However, on the question whether there is good faith in the purchases made by the petitioners, he held that the petitioners ought to have enquired in detail whether the lands are Zirayati or Assigned lands, and whether the sellers have title to the lands. He also observed that the sale consideration under the sale documents represent the prevailing market rate. Questioning the said order, these writ petitions are filed.

3. We have perused the records. As per the directions of this Court in the earlier writ petition No. 11952 of 1983 and Batch, the authorities are directed to find out whether Section 3(5) of Act 9 of 1977 is applicable to these transactions. Under Section 3(5) if the vendee being a landless poor person bonafide purchases assigned land, the sale shall not be affected. As already seen, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Anandapuram in the impugned order found that the petitioners are landless poor persons, but he observed that the sales are not in good faith since they have not made necessary enquiries which they ought to have made whether the lands are zirayati or Assigned lands, and whether the vendors have title over the lands.

4. The word 'good faith' occurring in Section 3(5) of the Act should be understood in the context whether there are bona fides in the transactions. In other words, the test should be whether the transaction is genuine, whether the sale consideration passed, whether possession was delivered, whether the transaction is not sham and nominal and is not benami, or a make-believe affair. The observation of the learned Mandal Revenue Officer that the enquiry should relate to the fact whether such a land can be purchased does not arise as the exception applies only to such sales. Unless the land is an assigned land, the consideration of good faith as a relevant factor does not arise. Therefore, the enquiry relating to the fact whether the land is an assigned land or not cannot be a relevant consideration. The only consideration should be whether the transaction is genuine, and whether it is intended to be acted upon. In other words the transaction is for consideration and in all the respects true and honest. In our view the enquiry should relate to these aspects and not whether the land is Zirayati, Patta land or Assigned land. As already seen the learned Mandal Revenue Officer has found that the consideration under the sale deeds represents the market value. Therefore, there is nothing to suspect the bona fides of the sales, nor there is any under-hand dealing in these transactions. Therefore, we set-aside the impugned orders and hold that the sale transactions are saved by Section 3(5) of A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act.

5. The Writ Petition Nos. 3942; 4335; 4336; 4460; 4461; and 4462 of 1989 are accordingly allowed, but in the circumstances without costs.