The validity of property title transfers depends on registered deeds and the nature of ownership, particularly in joint family scenarios, as established by the prior sale deeds.

JUDGMENT :

(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE, J.)

This appeal is from a divergent finding in a suit for declaration of title and injunction. The plaintiff sought declaration that he is the absolute owner of the suit schedule property bearing Sy.No.127/5 of Kambadahalli village, Taluk:Mandya. The total extent of the land is 26 guntas.

2. The declaration is essentially sought based on the registered sale deed dated 14.01.1991 said to have been executed by Rame Gowda who is admittedly the son-in-law of the plaintiff. Defendants contested the suit on the premise that Rame Gowda had no title over the property as Rame Gowda had sold the very same property under the sale deed dated 20.11.1990 which was registered on 29.08.1992 pursuant to the order passed by the District Registrar, Mandya in R.A. No.2/1991-92.

3. The Trial Court decreed the suit holding that the plaintiff is the absolute owner pursuant to the registered sale deed dated 14.01.1991. Defendants' appeal in RA No.176/2005 on the file of Principal District Judge, Mandya was allowed. The judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court were set-aside. Liberty is granted to the plaintiff to file a suit for partition by including all the joint family properties of Nanje Gowda and his family members. It is necessary to mention that Nanje Gowda under registered sale deed dated 31.01.1990 had made a claim that he had sold the suit schedule properties to Rame Gowda.

4. The plaintiff is before this Court in Second Appeal. Defendants have not assailed the said judgment and decree on the premise that the suit is dismissed in its entirety though the liberty is granted to the plaintiff to file a suit.

5. Certain facts are admitted:

One Nanje Gowda sold the suit property under the registered sale deed 31.01.1990 in favour of Rame Gowda. Brother of Nanje Gowda -defendant No.1 and two sons of Nanje Gowda namely defendants No.2 and 3 filed objections to the said sale on the premise that the property is a joint family property and Nanje Gowda had no right to alienate the property. Mutation was not changed accepting the objection filed by defendants No.1 to 3. Subsequently, there was a Panchayat among Rame Gowda, Nanje Gowda and the defendants. The defendants claim that Rame Gowda agreed to reconvey the property. It is further stated by the defendants that on 20.11.1990, Rame Gowda executed a sale deed in favour of defendants and the sale deed was not registered as the property records were not in the name of Rame Gowda in view of the objections raised by the defendants in earlier occasion. The application is filed by defendants No.1 to 3 to record the name of Rame Gowda in the property records to facilitate registration of the sale deed. Said application was allowed on 22.12.1990.

Thereafter, on 14.01.1991, Rame Gowda executed a sale deed in favour of the plaintiff his father- in- law. Defendants being aggrieved by the order refusing registration had filed an appeal in RA No.2/1991-92 before the District Registrar. The Appellate Authority had allowed the appeal and directed registration of the sale deed dated 20.11.1990 and that was registered on 29.08.1992.

6. Defendants essentially took a contention that in view of the registration of sale deed dated 20.11.1990, which was registered on 29.08.1992 in view of the application of Section 47 and Section 75(3) of the REGISTRATION ACT , 1908, the sale becomes effective and valid with effect from 20.11.1990 and based on this cont