Supreme Court rules three-year fishing rights deed is lease of immovable property

The Supreme Court determined that such rights amount to a 'profit à prendre' and are treated as immovable property under Indian law.

Who it concerns: Petitioner: Zaki Ullah Khan; Respondents: State of U.P. and others; Bench: Not explicitly stated in the provided text (though counsel Mr. Abhishek Swarup and Mr. Shaurya Sahay are mentioned).

What the court decided

• The Court held that the deed granting fishing rights is a transfer of immovable property and amounts to a lease.
• The Court affirmed that the right to catch fish is a 'profit à prendre' and a benefit arising out of land, thus classified as immovable property.
• The Court rejected the argument that the restriction of fishing to 10 months per year (due to breeding seasons) reduces the license period to less than one year.
• The Court upheld the liability of the appellant to pay the deficit stamp duty of Rs. 15,72,525/- as determined by the Collector and affirmed by the High Court.

Also in the document

• The Court distinguished the present case from 'Farookh Ahmad vs. State of Uttar Pradesh' (2025), noting that the current deed was for a total period of three years.
• The Court cited 'Anand Behera & Anr. V State of Orissa & Anr.' (1955) and 'Santosh Jayaswal & Anr. V State of M.P. & Ors.' (1995) to establish that fishing rights are immovable property requiring registration and stamp duty if the value exceeds Rs. 100 or the term exceeds one year.
• The Court noted that the restriction on fishing during the breeding season is a regulatory suspension under the U.P. Fisheries Act, 1948, and does not alter the duration of the license.