Civil Court dismisses nephew’s claim over property in Rhenock, upholds Sikkim land laws

The Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Pakyong, presided by Ms. Urvashi Pradhan, has dismissed the claim of a man seeking rights over a property in Rhenock Bazar, Pakyong District, Sikkim. The case, titled Title Suit No. 01 of 2024 (Uday Kumar Pandey vs Bijay Kumar Pandey and Others), revolved around a two-storied wooden house and its adjoining land that once belonged to late Gopal Pandey.

The plaintiff, Mr. Uday Kumar Pandey, a nephew of the deceased, had approached the court stating that both he and the defendant, Mr. Bijay Kumar Pandey, were the only surviving legal heirs of the late Gopal Pandey. He claimed that the property in question was purchased by Gopal Pandey and hence, he had an equal right to it.

However, the court carefully examined the facts and legal provisions and came to a different conclusion. The court held that the property was not purchased, but was in fact allotted to the late Gopal Pandey by the Urban Development and Housing Department (UDHD), Government of Sikkim.

The court observed that the plaintiff failed to submit any document to clarify whether the site was allotted on a temporary or permanent basis. More importantly, the court noted that the relevant laws—The Sikkim Allotment of House Sites and Construction of Buildings (Regulation and Control) Act, 1985 and The Sikkim Regulation of Transfer of Land Act, 2005—do not recognize nephews as part of the family for the purpose of transfer of allotted land.

The judgment also noted that the plaintiff does not meet the basic legal requirements for holding land in Sikkim. During the proceedings, the plaintiff admitted that he was not a Sikkim Subject, did not hold a Certificate of Identification, and had no Residential Certificate. These documents are mandatory for acquiring immovable property in the state.

The court clarified that regardless of whether the site was allotted temporarily or permanently, the plaintiff could not be granted rights over it. If the site was allotted on a temporary basis, then as per the law, the land would automatically revert to the State Government after the death of the allottee, in this case, Gopal Pandey. And if the land was allotted permanently, even then the plaintiff could not claim it because he was not a legally eligible family member and lacked the required documents.

The court also declared a partition deed that had earlier been signed between the plaintiff and the defendant as invalid. It said that since the plaintiff was not legally eligible to claim the property under Sikkim’s land laws, such a deed had no value in the eyes of the law.