Verifying Five Shares in Gat No. 45/1
In a partition case at Koregaon circle, the Talathi must verify the mutation proposed for Gat No. 45/1: total area 3.60 hectares, of which 0.18 hectare appears as potkharab in the 7/12. The recorded khatedar, Bhausaheb, died intestate in March 2024, leaving his widow, two sons and two daughters, all alive. The clerk proposes five equal shares and has already written in the draft: “Son 1 - 0.684 ha; Son 2 - 0.684 ha; Widow - 0.684 ha; Daughter 1 - 0.684 ha; Daughter 2 - 0.684 ha.” Son 1 has separately sold half of his share to a neighbour by a registered sale deed dated 4 June 2025, and the deed is on the file. The 7/12 sketch shows the field as a rectangle of 200 m by 180 m. The circle inspector wants the entries certified before month-end; two objections about the potkharab figure have been filed, but no evidence has been produced.
1. Check the clerk's figures. What is each heir's correct share, and exactly where did he go wrong?
Read the worked answer
Correct share: 3.60 ÷ 5 = 0.720 ha each. The clerk's figure 0.684 comes from (3.60 − 0.18) ÷ 5 = 3.42 ÷ 5. He divided the net cultivable area. That is the error: a share is a share of the whole survey number, potkharab included. The potkharab is a description of part of the land, not a deduction made before partition; the 7/12 shows it separately so that the cultivable portion can be identified, and each heir takes a proportionate slice of the potkharab too. Self-checking test: 0.684 × 5 = 3.420, which leaves 0.180 ha unaccounted. A column that does not add back to the survey number total is always wrong. Running this check before writing the draft would have caught the mistake in one line.
2. After the sale by Son 1, set out every holding and prove the total. How should rounding be handled?
Read the worked answer
Son 1's share is 0.720 ha; he sells half, that is 0.360 ha.
| Holder | Area (ha) |
|---|---|
| Widow | 0.720 |
| Son 1 (retained) | 0.360 |
| Son 2 | 0.720 |
| Daughter 1 | 0.720 |
| Daughter 2 | 0.720 |
| Purchaser (from Son 1) | 0.360 |
| Total | 3.600 |
| The purchaser's name goes in the holder's column, because a registered sale deed transfers ownership; the heir's name is reduced to 0.360 in the same entry. | |
| Rounding: work to three decimals throughout and never round each entry independently. Add the rounded figures; if the column falls short of or exceeds 3.600 by 0.001, adjust the smallest fractional holding, not the largest, and note the adjustment in the remarks column so the arithmetic is reproducible on appeal. |
3. The purchaser wants his 0.360 ha marked on the ground. Using the sketch, test whether the numbers are consistent and state what the Talathi may and may not do.
Read the worked answer
Consistency check: 200 m × 180 m = 36,000 m² = 3.60 ha. The sketch and the recorded area agree, so the 7/12 area is not in doubt. Strip width: 0.360 ha = 3,600 m². Laid as a strip of uniform width along the 180 m side, the width is 3,600 ÷ 180 = 20 m. What the Talathi may do: compute the width, show it on a sketch, and record it as a proposal. What he may not do: treat 20 m as a settled boundary. A strip carved by arithmetic ignores the well, the approach path and the shape of the adjoining holdings, and a subdivision on the ground requires a survey and a potkhata with notice to the co-holders. The correct course is to certify the shares (which are pure arithmetic) and to route the physical division to the survey establishment, noting the proposed 20 m strip as indicative only.