Sri Prasanta Kumar Pal & Ors. vs The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

8 April 2025

Case No.

Civil Appeal No. 5078 of 2025

Result

Allowed

Bench

Rajesh Bindal, N Kotiswar Singh

Citation

[2025] 4 S.C.R. 2606 : 2025 INSC 783

Acts & Sections

West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955

Issue for consideration

Whether the observation of the Revenue Officer, as prima facie accepted by the High Court that the transaction of gift deed dated 07.12.1967 was a Benami transaction is totally erroneous as the amendment (2nd and 3rd Amendment in the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955) came into effect almost two decades after registered gift deed was executed.

Headnote

West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 – 2nd Amendment (came into force on 07.08.1969) and 3rd Amendment (came into force on 12.05.1989) – s.14T(3) r/w ss.14M, 14T (8) & (9) & 14S – Determination of surplus land – The Revenue Officer vide order dated 16.06.1997 held that the gift deed executed on 07.12.1967 (vide which 20.88½ acres of land was transferred) was a benami transaction – After adding the aforesaid area, surplus area was again redetermined – Tribunal set aside the order of the Revenue Officer – Aggrieved, the State preferred the writ petition, which was accepted by the High Court and the matter was remitted back – Correctness:

Held: The facts on record, which are not in dispute are that the aforesaid gift deed was executed by one ICP on 07.12.1967, gifting some part of his land holding to his three sons and three daughters, leaving substantial portion with him – When calculated in terms of the 1955 Act, an area of 8.80 acres was declared as surplus and the same vested in the State – The aforesaid registered gift deed dated 07.12.1967 was given effect to in the revenue records on 26.05.1969 – It will be absurd to accept the argument that such a transaction can be held to be Benami with reference to an amendment carried in the 1955 Act with effect from 12.05.1989, as no one could possibly dream that the land holding had to be distributed amongst the family members to avoid it being declared as surplus on a later date – The genuineness of the registered gift deed executed on 07.12.1967 could not be put in question two decades later only because an amendment had been carried out in 1989 with retrospective effect – In the aforesaid factual matrix of the case, the High Court has committed an error in setting aside the order passed by the Tribunal by remitting the case for examination afresh as no two opinions could be formed on the basis of the facts. [Paras 12-14 and 16]

Order 1. Leave granted. 2. The appellants have filed the present appeal impugning the order dated 08.09.2021 passed by the High Court1 in a Writ Petition2. Vide aforesaid order, the High Court had set aside the order dated 11.01.2019 passed by the Tribunal3 in Original Application No.452 of 2008. 3. Briefly, the argument raised by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants is that one Iswar Chandra Pal had executed a registered gift deed dated 07.12.1967 in favour of his sons and daughters. Vide the aforesaid Gift Deed 20.88½ acres of land was transferred. The same was given effect to

View Subscription Plans →