the story So Far:
The Supreme Court of India in its recent decision… Samiullah vs State of Bihardescribed the process of buying and selling property as “painful” for many Indians. This observation resonates widely, reflecting the complex and often challenging realities of land transactions in the country.
What decision did the Supreme Court give in the Samiullah case?
The Supreme Court examined the validity of bye-laws introduced under the Bihar Registration Rules in 2019, which empowered registration authorities to refuse registration of documents transferring property, such as sale or gift deeds, if the seller could not provide proof of mutation, including in the documents. Jamabandi Or holding an allotment.
The court struck down these by-laws as ultra vires and arbitrary for three reasons.
First, the rules went beyond the powers given to the Inspector General of Registration under the Registration Act. Second, by requiring sellers to produce proof of mutation as a prerequisite to registering a document, the rules effectively demanded proof of ownership. This was considered contrary to the purpose of the Registration Act. This reduced the ability to freely transfer property, which had a significant impact on the constitutionally protected right to property. Third, with the Bihar Mutation Act and the Bihar Special Survey and Settlement Act being far from complete, it was almost impossible to obtain proof of mutation.
The court reaffirmed that registration of the transfer deed is different from establishing title or ownership. Investigation of questions of title and ownership falls within the purview of civil courts, not registration offices. The court concluded that the pre-conditions for registration relate to the identity of the property and the seller. Reference to maps or surveys is made for this purpose only if it is practical.
Why is registration different from title?
The State of Bihar argued that mandatory proof of mutation would ensure the integrity of the sale transaction by linking the registration with the actual title. While the court acknowledged the merits in synchronization, it cited the lack of nationwide land surveys since the 1950s and inadequate digitization of land records as significant obstacles.
The court stated that, until a definitive title is integrated with the registration process, it is the responsibility of the constitutional courts to strike a balance between the freedom of individuals to buy and sell property and the government’s obligation to maintain the integrity of property transactions.
In June, in K.Gopi vs Sub-Registrar, The Supreme Court, while clarifying the position of law on registration and ownership, had said that the Sub-Registrar is not concerned with the title of the property as he lacks judicial power to decide on questions relating to ownership. Thus, it struck down a rule made by the State of Tamil Nadu which empowered sub-registrars to refuse registration of sale deeds on the ground that the seller has not established title or ownership. The rule obliged the seller to produce the original deed through which ownership was acquired.
Similar reasoning is evident in the Court’s frequent decisions Samiullah,
Both the judgments underline that the Registration Act is concerned only with the registration of documents. Registration only creates a rebuttable presumption of ownership, not conclusive proof. The upcoming Registration Bill, 2025 – which seeks to replace the Registration Act of 1908 – is in line with this position. The basis of these regulations is that the power to refuse registration cannot be construed as empowering the registering authorities to decide on questions of title or ownership of property, which are within the jurisdiction of a competent court.
Although this situation only reinforces a long-established principle, it is a timely reminder of the complexity of land administration and the need for reform.
Why has buying and selling property in India become ‘painful’?
Land administration in India is a mix of colonial law, complex administrative systems and an overburdened judiciary. This often results in protracted battles for land, whether bureaucratic or judicial.
The three separate domains – registration, survey and settlement, and revenue – operate independently, making synchronization of records a frequent challenge. Each department is governed by a separate legislative and administrative mandate. Furthermore, the current system only creates a presumption of ownership, which can be challenged in court using evidence such as past deeds, revenue receipts, mutation records, proof of possession, or even competing sale deeds. This places a heavy burden on buyers to conduct thorough due diligence before purchasing a property.
As well as understanding the legislative and administrative design on land records, it is important to recognize the complexities arising from historical inconsistencies in land administration in the Indian subcontinent. Over the centuries, the region has been ruled by different rulers, each imposing different revenue systems. The legacy of diverse administrative practices, colonial rule, differing rules applied in princely states, creation of different types of titles, and important post-independence reforms, such as the Land Ceiling Act, have resulted in a highly complex and regionally diverse socio-legal framework for land.
What is the way forward for land administration reform?
The solution lies in large-scale administrative reform. There is a need to focus on creating an integrated and synchronized record-keeping system that reduces the risk of fraud. Efforts are underway at both the Central and State levels to digitize and modernize land records.
For example, Karnataka’s land and Cauvery systems link records of rights with registration, with ownership records automatically updated upon registration of transfer deeds. Similar integration efforts are being made for spatial data and revenue records, although primarily for agricultural land.
Technology is playing an important role in these reform initiatives. From digitizing records to tech-enabling workflow processes, there is also a growing discussion on the role of artificial intelligence and blockchain technologies. In fact, the Supreme Court in its recent judgment has suggested exploring blockchain technology to create secure, transparent and tamper-proof land records. Andhra Pradesh’s pilot project using blockchain for land records has reportedly halved land disputes and improved transaction efficiency by 30%.
How will blockchain work?
Blockchain, as its nickname suggests, is a series of blocks of data linked in an uneditable, digital chain. This information is stored in an open-source, decentralized environment, with each block’s information verifiable by every participating computer. Unlike traditional hierarchical systems, it is designed for decentralized management, with the aim of building trust and stability.
Blocks are ledgers that are being updated and filled with permanently recorded data. Transactions are added to this database and synced across all nodes. These blockchains work on a distributed ledger, meaning all information and transactions are shared between parties regardless of geography or location.
These ledgers may or may not be permitted, depending on who is allowed to view them. The nature of this decentralized block database system prevents hackers from tampering with or changing information on the blockchain, as changing even a single piece of code would be instantly detectable. Due to the distributed ledger transaction system it is difficult to fraudulently attempt to double spend digital currency or assets by duplicating them.
In this way, the distributed ledger is an immutable record that is consistent and chronologically organized. If we apply this system to land records, we can create a block for a piece of land that will contain all its historical records, titles, heirs of title holders, geographical location, survey details, its map, water resources, crops, as well as all the registered documents associated with the particular land. Any further transaction of the same land will create another linked block of information, creating a continuously updated, transparent and immutable network of land records. However, we also have to ensure that the information stored in these blocks is accurate, otherwise it will create an additional burden on owners to correct such data. More importantly, there is a need to address existing land governance and related structures before introducing new technologies.
The recent judgment of the Supreme Court highlights the urgent need for administrative and technical reforms. Understanding the deep complexities of India’s land governance is the first step toward meaningful solutions that secure property rights for all.
Girija Bhosale works as Research Coordinator in Real Estate at the National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bengaluru; Malini Mallikarjuna is Head of Real Estate at NIAS
