Land Ownership Up in Air as Supreme Court Throws Out Agreement.
The Supreme Court of India recently settled a land ownership dispute between the State of Madhya Pradesh, the Bhopal Municipal Corporation (BMC), and the late Satish Jain's heirs.
A Contested Claim:
The case began with Satish Jain suing the State claiming ownership of a specific parcel of land. He won an initial ex-parte judgment (decided without the State's defense) but the State successfully appealed, rendering the judgment invalid.
An Agreement in Question:
Before the State's appeal, Jain and the BMC entered into an agreement on July 30, 1991. This agreement likely involved some exchange related to the disputed land, but its details are not mentioned. The crux of the issue lies in the fact that this agreement relied on the validity of the ex-parte decree which was later overturned.
State's Argument Prevails:
The State argued that since the ex-parte decree was invalid, the agreement between Jain and BMC could not hold weight. The Supreme Court agreed. They ruled that the agreement cannot be a basis for land ownership claims and that BMC could not have acquired rights through an agreement based on an invalid judgment.
The Path Forward:
The court's decision allows the State to proceed with the lawsuit to determine the rightful owner of the land. The fate of any pending applications related to the case before the Trial Court remains unclear.
Unresolved Issues:
While the Supreme Court's ruling settles the question of the agreement's validity, it doesn't address the specific details of the BMC's involvement or the claims Jain's heirs might have on the land. These aspects likely form part of the ongoing lawsuit before the Trial Court.