Jamnabai And Others Vs Vasudev And Others (Supreme Court of India)
SC: Mutation Entries Do Not Confer or Extinguish Title; Unregistered Relinquishment Cannot Defeat Co-owner’s Property Rights
In Jamnabai & Ors. v. Vasudev & Ors. [2026 INSC 900], the Supreme Court dealt with a dispute concerning ownership and partition of 12.41 acres of agricultural land in Indore inherited by two brothers, Ramprasad and Vasudev.
The respondents claimed that Ramprasad had relinquished his share in favour of Vasudev and his son through certain statements before the revenue authorities and a subsequent consent/relinquishment document (Ex.D5). Based on these documents, Ramprasad’s name had been removed from the revenue records in 1990. The Trial Court and First Appellate Court rejected the alleged relinquishment and upheld the rights of Ramprasad’s legal heirs. However, the Madhya Pradesh High Court, in second appeal under Section 100 CPC, reversed the concurrent findings, holding inter alia that the suit filed in 2008 was barred by limitation.
The Supreme Court reversed the High Court. It held that the burden of proving relinquishment of an interest in immovable property lies upon the person asserting it. A proprietary right cannot be regarded as voluntarily abandoned merely because the revenue records subsequently show another person’s name; the underlying transaction by which title was allegedly surrendered must itself be independently established.
