Registrability of notification under 4(1) of LA Act1894
Baskaran Kanakasabai
(Querist) 25 May 2010
This query is : Resolved
Pl. refer the judgments of the following cases:
a. Bombay High Court: WP 3031 of 2004
b. Supreme Court: SC 540- 1996
c. Supreme Court: SC 812-1995
d. Madras High Court: WP 4417 of 1997)
In all these cases alienation of title of land has happened after 4(1) notification.
In all these cases such notifications have not been registered. Had the notification under 4(1) been registered, such alienations would not have happened in any of those cases.
Such alienations have been happening probably for over a century and even till date. In all the 4 cases cited, such alienations have been declared void and thus the person who bought such notified land unaware of the LA proceedings pending behind such lands, is deprived of his right to property without any compensation at all for no known fault of his.
In land acquisition laws in New Zealand or Australia similar notification under similar laws are registrable compulsorily.
So, my contention is that if the registrability or non-registrability of a notification is going to decide the validity of the registered title of a land onwner, such notification should have been categorized as compulsorily registrable by the law of the land concerned.What harm is there on the part of the Government in registering such notifications, especially in light of the fact that such registration would prevent the event of innocent citizens being deprived of their fundamental right to property?
niranjan
(Expert) 25 May 2010
Instead, award needs tobe registered.Sec.4 notf.shows the intention of govt.to acquire the land.
Baskaran Kanakasabai
(Querist) 25 May 2010
Dear Sir
Thanks for your reply.
If award is registered, atleast the potential buyers who attempt to buy(unaware) such LA awarded lands will be refused registration and thus they will be saved from the definite event of losing their lands.
But what is the current status of registrability of the award under sec 11(1)?
Is it registrable?
If so, compulsorily?
or optionally?
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 25 May 2010
Unfortunately it is optional. I do agree with you that various innocent persons do purchase such properties under acquisition and thus lose their hard earned money without their role. Registrability of notification should be made compulsory.
Baskaran Kanakasabai
(Querist) 26 May 2010
Thank you Sir,
Thanks very much for saying so.
If award under 11(1) is optionally registrable, and if the LAO or acquiring State Govt has not opted to register such award regarding a particular land under such award and if such land is alienated by a registered sale deed,
according to sec 50 of Registration Act 1908 which says:
"50. Certain registered documents relating to land to take effect against unregistered documents
(1) Every document of the kinds mentioned in clauses (a), (b), (c) and (d) of section 17, sub-section (1), and clauses (a) and (b) of section 18, shall, if duly registered, take effect as regards the property comprised therein, against every unregistered document relating to the same property, and not being a decree or order, whether such unregistered document be of the same nature as the registered document or not.
(2) Nothing in sub-section (1) applies to leases exempted under the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 17 or to any document mentioned in sub-section (2) of the same section, or to any registered document which had not priority under the law in force at the commencement of this Act."
the registered alienation will become valid and the award will become void is n't it so? If the award becomes invalid the entire acquisition becomes void in all the 4 cases mentioned below":
a. Bombay High Court: WP 3031 of 2004
b. Supreme Court: SC 540- 1996
c. Supreme Court: SC 812-1995
d. Madras High Court: WP 4417 of 1997)
and also the hundreds of cases where alienation happened after 4(1) notification.
Is n't it so?
