Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.
GYAN CHAND VERMA – Appellant
Versus
VEENA RANI – Respondent
RFA No. 344 of 2014
Decided On : 30-09-2016
Property Dispute - Transfer of Property - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Suraj Lamp and Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana - Section 114, Section 92 - The court discussed the transfer of property, the validity of documents, and the payment of consideration. It highlighted the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and the Suraj Lamp case, and concluded that the documents of transfer of property constituted a valid sale, complete with a sale consideration, thereby creating rights as to ownership, title, possession, and interest with respect to the property in question.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, father-in-law of the respondent, filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction, alleging that the respondent had forcibly obtained a General Power of Attorney and other documents of transfer of the property in question. The court partly decreed the suit, restraining the respondent from dispossessing the appellant from the property without due process of law.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant was not entitled to the decree for declaration or permanent injunction, but granted a limited relief restraining the respondent from dispossessing the appellant from the property without following due process of law.
Issues: The issues revolved around the entitlement of the appellant to a decree for declaration and permanent injunction.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the documents of transfer of property constituted a valid sale, complete with a sale consideration, thereby creating rights as to ownership, title, possession, and interest with respect to the property in question.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed as devoid of merit.
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.
1. The present appeal assails the judgment and decree dated 26.03.2014, passed by the Court of Ld. Additional District Judge (North-East)-01, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, whereby Suit No. 38/2008 titled as Gyan Chand Verma v. Veena Rani, for declaration and permanent injunction, filed by the appellant (Plaintiff therein), has been partly decreed in favour of the appellant to the limited extent that the respondent has been restrained from dispossessing the appellant from property bearing No. D-1/37 built on plot measuring 67, out of Khasra No. 21, situated at village Mandoli in the abadi of Gali No. 27, Harsh Vihar, Shahdara, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the property in question), without adopting due process of law. The other reliefs sought in the suit, being declaration qua the property in question and permanent injunction against the respondent, were not granted vide the judgment and decree dated 26.03.2014, impugned herein.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellant is the father-in-law of the respondent and it is alleged in the former’s plaint that he is the owner of, and in possession of the property in question, transfer of which property, in favour of the respondent, has been assailed by the appellant in the present appeal.
3. The averments made by the appellant in his plaint and facts alleged by him while tendering evidence by way of an affidavit (Ex. PW-1/1) can be summarised as herein-under:
(i) The appellant bought a property at Ashok Nagar, Delhi, out of his earnings while he was working as a goldsmith, which was subsequently sold and the property in question was purchased, from one, Smt. Omwati on 25.01.1993, originally measuring 100 sq. yards.
(ii) Out of the property in question, the appellant sold 25 sq. yards of the same, to his son, Sh. A.K. Verma, after receiving consideration from the latter.
(iii) The appellant raised construction on the said plot (remaining 75 sq. yards) from his own funds and thereafter his other sons started pressurising him to transfer the property in question in their names.
(iv) The respondent, being the wife of the other son of the appellant, namely Sh. Pramod Kumar (DW-2), pressurised the appellant to execute a General Power of Attorney dated 22.11.2006 (Ex.PW-1/A) in her favour which was registered in the office of Sub-Registrar, Nand Nagri, Delhi. The former also got executed on 22.11.2006, certain documents of transfer of the property in question in her favour, forcibly.
(v) The appellant was living in the property in question alongwith his wife and daughter at the time of execution of the said GPA dated 22.11.2006 (Ex.PW-1/A) and continued to reside at the property in question after the execution of the said GPA and other documents of transfer of the property in question.
(vi) The sale consideration was not paid as per the market value of the property in question which was stated to be Rs.15,00,000/- at the time of the execution of the said GPA dated 22.11.2006 (Ex.PW-1/A), and that the respondent alongwith her associate, one Mr. Rakesh Kumar, threatened the appellant with dire consequences if the latter demanded the consideration amount from the former.
(vii) The appellant had borrowed Rs. 5,00,000/- from his friend and was not being able to repay the same, since the respondent had not paid to him the consideration amount, and the former suffered mental and physical problems on this account.
(viii) The respondent alongwith her associates entered the property in question on various occasions and tried to dispossess the appellant and his family from the property in question and threatened the appellant with dire consequences if the property in question was not vacated. The matter was reported to the police authorities but no action was taken on the same.
(ix) A complaint dated 13.06.2008 (Ex. PW-1/D) was made to the police authorities, alleging that the respondent had got executed the GPA dated 22.11.2006 (Ex.PW-1/A) by the appellant in
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
