47-year-old land dispute: Punjab and Haryana High Court upholds protection for bona fide buyer

The case concerns 40 kanal 14 marla of land in Lalpura village, Balachaur, originally allotted as surplus land to Gurmail Singh in 1977. He later sold part of it to Kewal Singh through a registered sale deed in 1981.

The Punjab Government argued that the 1973 Utilisation of Surplus Area Scheme barred the allottee from selling the land for 15 years and that the sale violated Clause 10(c).

Justice Gupta rejected the plea after noting that the State’s own records contradicted its stand.

“The Sale Certificate dated November 23, 1978, issued by the State in favour of Gurmail Singh, did not incorporate the non-alienation clause,” the judge said, adding that a government witness had admitted this omission during testimony. “This omission proved fatal to the State’s case,” he said.

The court also upheld the finding that Kewal Singh had made inquiries with the village patwari before purchase and that the revenue record showed the allottee as owner.

Section 41 of the Transfer of Property Act, the judge said, acts as “a shield for an honest buyer”. “Since Gurmail Singh was the ostensible owner and Kewal Singh exercised reasonable care in good faith, his purchase for consideration was protected against the State’s claim,” he noted.

The court further found that the Collector’s 1983 cancellation of the allotment was passed without giving any hearing to either the seller or the purchaser. Justice Gupta termed this a “clear violation of the principle of natural justice”.

Another factor that weighed against the state government was the issue of parity. Gurmail Singh had sold the remaining portion of the land to another buyer, Laxman Singh, who also won a suit on identical facts. The State never challenged that decree.

“In the circumstances, the State cannot be allowed to pursue the same legal argument against Kewal Singh, when it had acquiesced in the parallel suit,” Justice Gupta said.

Finding the appeal “devoid of merit”, the court upheld the 1994 trial court decree and the 1996 appellate court order recognising Kewal Singh as owner in possession.

The High Court dismissed the state government’s challenge in full.