The certificate of purchase cannot be conclusive proof of title vis-à-vis joint tenants of land, the Bombay High Court has held.
In case of a joint family property, Justice Anuja Prabhudessai has held, the certificate of purchase issued in the name of karta or an elder of the family is actually for or on behalf of the joint family.
This judgement has been held while the court was hearing an appeal against the judgment of a Joint District Judge, Thane, dated January 24, 1990, wherein compensation for sale of a land in Thane was directed to be divided equally between descendants of co-tenants Vithu and Gajanan.
Changa Agaskar was the original owner of the land, which was cultivated together, by his sons Vithu and Gajanan as a joint family property, after his death.
Vithu has claimed that he has purchased the said land, and upon payment of the entire purchase price, he was issued the certificate of purchase. He has therefore claimed, that he is the exclusive owner and is entitled to receive the entire amount of compensation.
However, the descendants of Gajanan have claimed that even after the demise of Changa and Gajanan, they continued to cultivate the land as a joint family property, and that the land was never partitioned. They have denied that Vithu was the sole purchaser of the land and have claimed that they are the co-tenants of the land and entitled for 50% of the compensation amount.
The Court, in the judgement has observed that Vithu was not the sole tenant of the land in question but had only inherited the tenancy rights upon the death of Changa. The claimant had also not adduced evidence to prove that the subject property was partitioned during the lifetime of Vithu and Gajanan or that they were cultivating the property or their respective shares separately. Hence, it has held, that the judgement of the Joint District Judge was justified.
Vithu had also, not provided any notice to Gajanan before deleting or bracketing his name from the survey records.
Thus, the court rejected the appeal against judgment of the District Judge in Thane and said: “Under such circumstances, the certificate of purchase issued in the name of Vithu, would be for and on behalf of the joint family. The said certificate would at the most be conclusive proof of purchase against the owner of the land. The tenancy rights of the joint tenants cannot be negated solely on the ground that the certificate of purchase was issued in favour of Karta of a joint family or any elderly person of a joint family. Hence, the certificate of purchase cannot be the conclusive proof of title, vis-a-vis the joint tenants.”
Document:
