advocate supreme court LAW INSIDER IN

Tanya Gupta

Published on: March 7, 2022 at 18:31 IST

The Supreme Court recently reaffirmed that Mutation Entries alone do not bestow a Title in the Case of Commissioner, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Vs. Faraulla Khan.

An Observation was made by a Bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachud while he was disposing of an Appeal filed by the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP).

The Petition Challenges a Kerala High Court Decision directing the Renaming of a Property in the Names of Certain Parties.

It was asserted that the High Court should not have Issued a Direction for Mutation since there was a Title Suit pending involving the Suit Property.

The Court noted that there was elucidation in the said High Court’s Judgement at the initial phase. It asserted that the current Trajectory for Mutation is susceptible to any other remedies that are mentioned in the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 and it is willing to establish its Title through the Judicial Process.

The Court restated in this context that Mutation Entries do not bestow a Title by themselves, it must be Exhibited Autonomously in a Declaratory Suit.

Consequently, the Court refused to grant Interim Relief to the Corporation, stating that the matter should be Heard in the Civil Court where the Case is currently pending.

Case No.: SLP NO.: 5743 of 2020

Also Read: Supreme Court: 2 Weeks to UPSC to Respond to Civil Services Aspirants Plea Seeking Additional Attempt in Mains Exam

Related Post