Mutation | Tehsildar Can't Relegate A Person To Civil Court To Seek Declaration That He Is Legal Representative Of Deceased Owner: MP High Court

The Indore Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that Tehsildar cannot relegate a person to Civil Court to seek declaration that he is the legal representative of the deceased property owner, to get his name mutated.

A single judge bench of Justice Pranay Verma observed, “There is no requirement for the applicant to seek any declaration from the Civil Court that he is the legal representative of the deceased. The Tehsildar can very well consider and determine the geneology between the parties. In fact, it is his duty to do so and he cannot relegate the petitioner to the Civil Court for seeking a declaration as has been directed by the impugned order.”

The present petition challenges the order passed by the Tehsildar, Tehsil Dr. Ambedkar Nagar (Mhow), District Indore, whereby petitioner's application under Sections 109, 110 of M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 had been rejected.

The petitioner had filed an application before the Tehsildar for being mutated over the disputed land submitting that the same was held by him and his brother Rajeev, who has expired and now he was the only person entitled to be mutated over the land. His father, Ramakant Shukla and his mother had already expired. It was further submitted that there was no other legal representative of his deceased brother Rajeev, as he had already divorced his wife.

On the application, a publication was made by the Tehsildar, but no objection was received. A report was also called for from the Halka Patwari (official maintaining land records) which made it clear that there was no other legal representative of deceased Rajeev or any other person who may be having a claim for being mutated over the disputed land.

While referring to Sections 109, 110 of the Code, 1959, the court said that it is the duty of the Tehsildar himself to ascertain as to whether the petitioner is entitled to be mutated and it is well within his competence to consider the entitlement of petitioner to be mutated and if the same is sought for on the basis of death of some person, then whether the petitioner is his legal representative.

Thus, the court opined that there is no requirement for the applicant to seek any declaration from the Civil Court that he is the legal representative of the deceased and it is the duty of the Tehsildar to consider and determine the genealogy between the parties.

The impugned order passed by the Tehsildar was hence, quashed.

“The Tehsildar is directed to decide the application of the petitioner on merits by taking into consideration the material which is available on record, in view of the observations as made hereinabove and in view of provisions of Sections 109, 110 of the Code, 1959.”, the Court said.

Case Title: Rahul Shukla versus The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors, Writ Petition No. 1170 of 2025

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 35

Counsel for Petitioner: Adv. Abhinav Dhanodkar

Counsel for State: Adv. Tarun Pagare

Click Here To Read/Download Order