Orissa High Court nullifies fraudulent land sale, protects SC heirs in Keonjhar case

The case revolves around 4.40 acre of ancestral not partitioned land jointly owned by three brothers and three sisters belonging to a Scheduled Caste family.
The Orissa High Court
The Orissa High Court(File Photo | Express)
Updated on
2 min read

CUTTACK: In a significant judgment, the Orissa High Court has nullified a series of disputed land transactions involving undivided joint property in Baniapat Khuntapada, Keonjhar district, citing serious irregularities, fraud, and violation of Scheduled Caste rights.

Justice SK Panigrahi, in his order on July 18, held the sale deeds and all derivative rights arising from them as invalid, directing a freeze on compensation disbursement to the buyers of the land which was later acquired for a national highway project. He also directed the collector of Keonjhar to launch an inquiry into the lapses and initiate disciplinary action against erring officials, if necessary.

The case revolves around 4.40 acre of ancestral not partitioned land jointly owned by three brothers and three sisters belonging to a Scheduled Caste family. The three sisters Srimati Sethi, Saraswati Sethy and Malati Behera approached the court after being excluded from a series of sales of portions of the land executed between 2011 and 2014 by their brothers without their consent. Advocate Dayananda Mohapatra represented the petitioners.

The land was sold to Dillip Kumar Pati, a member of the general caste, via a dubious intermediary Balaram Patra, a daily wage labourer and BPL cardholder with no visible means to conduct transactions worth crores. The court noted that Patra’s role raised serious concerns suggestive of a potentially orchestrated pattern of irregularity.

The court found that original executants Tulasi and Maheswar Sethy were illiterate and likely unaware of the legal implications of the thumb impression-based sale deeds. The transactions, Justice Panigrahi stated, appeared to be part of a carefully engineered arrangement designed to exclude lawful coparceners (equal shareholders).

The land was later acquired for a National Highway project in 2015, with Rs 6.96 crore initially disbursed as compensation which was later on appeal enhanced to Rs 21.08 crore. While disposing of the petition, the high court has now directed the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) not to release any compensation to Dillip or his nominees, and recover any funds already paid.

NHAI has been asked to initiate an apportionment process with participation from all rightful heirs. Mutation entries in Dillip’s name have also been suspended pending lawful partition.

X
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com