the way lawmen respond to legal tangles
Baskaran Kanakasabai
(Querist) 21 June 2010
This query is : Resolved
If a lawyer or a judge had purchased a land 10 years ago under a registered sale deed with the registered owner of that land after duly obtaining a clean nil encumbrance certificate for previous 20 years from the SRO and built a house of his own obtaining a building loan from a bank through a registered mortgage, and lives in that house for a few years, and later if some government corporation claims that such land belongs to that corporation by virtue of a notification published under LA Act,1894 and the related proceedings or by virtue of proceedings of some such other Act notified 17 years ago,
What will be the reaction of such lawyer or judge in this scenario?
Daksh
(Expert) 21 June 2010
Dear Baskaran Kanakasabai,
You have yourself given answer to your query by mentioning the time period which evidences that three years after taking over the place the notification was notified which is a fresh cause of action. As such as the process states initially it is section 4, then Section 6 and lastly Section 9 notifications are issued by the appropriate statutory authority inviting comments and objections from the concerned parties by affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing as well. This exercise cultimates either in Land Acquisition by paying the affected persons and calling back the notification. (In the instant case at hand more particulars are required as to the entries in the revenue record, chronology of events and whether the requisite process inviting comments objection was duly complied with or not).
Best Regards
Daksh
Daksh
(Expert) 21 June 2010
Dear Baskaran Kanaksabai,
I forget to mention that Limitation Act also comes in the play as such.
Best Regards
Daksh
niranjan
(Expert) 21 June 2010
The purpose for which the land was acquired and yet the acquiring authority did not take the possession of the land within two years and if the acquisition did not reflect in the concerned govt. record, the purpose of acquisition is frustrated and so the concerned person can file the suit for such declaration.If the person who sold the land had knowledge about acquisition and yet he sold the land,the party can file suit for damages against that person.
Baskaran Kanakasabai
(Querist) 21 June 2010
year of purchase by the lawman:2000
EC obtained shows nil EC for period :1980-2000
Registered mortgage:2000
claim by govt corporation: in 2007
notification issued:1990
by the time(2007) govt corporation makes the claim the vendor who sold in 2000 is dead.(therefore it cannot be ascertained whether he had knowledge about acquisition or not.)
B K Raghavendra Rao
(Expert) 21 June 2010
When the government has acquired the land duly after notifications under Land Acquisition Act, then the government is the owner of the property. If some one has sold the property to Mr. X either with or without the knowledge of acquisition the basic fact is not altered.
The purchaser should have been cautious while purchasing the land. Had he made newspaper publication and taken EC for 30 years then he would have had some defence.
It is the lack of knowledge of lawman Mr. X who has purchased the land without taking sufficient care and hence he may have to suffer.
Mr. X cannot sue government. He can only proceed against the vendor for cheating. But as the vendor is dead no criminal proceedings could be initiated against him. Road for further action has ended.
Baskaran Kanakasabai
(Querist) 21 June 2010
Dear sir
The lawman who purchased the land had obtained a 20 year EC, i.e., for the period 1980-2000 which showed nil encumbrance. Had he obtained a 30 year EC , it would also have showed nil encumbrance.There is practically no difference between a 20 and 30 year EC in this case, because the Ec did not reflect the lien of the govt on the land by virtue of the LA proceedings.
On the contrary, when there is an unregistered lien of the govt on that land, how the SRO certified in his EC that there is no encumbrance affecting the title of the land? Is it not false and misleading?
Can the govt be sued for issuing a false and misleading certificate, which led to the dispute?
What is the law that governs the issue of certification and penalty for issuing false certificates?
Does it mean that every lawman who purchases land issues a newspaper publication to detect unknown encumbrances?
