Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SANGEETA K.VISHEN, NIRAL R.MEHTA
Swapnilbhai Arvindbhai Doshi – Appellant
Versus
Bahadursang Bhavsang – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NIRAL R. MEHTA, J.
1. This Appeal, at the instance of the original plaintiffs, is directed against the order dated 17th January, 2025 passed in Special Civil Suit No.675 of 2017 passed below Exh.17 by learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Sanand, Ahmedabad (Rural), whereby the learned Judge has rejected the plaint under the provisions of the Order VII Rule 11(a) and 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
2. Basic facts of the case can be stated as under:
2.1 Land bearing Survey No.314 admeasuring 5868 sq. mtrs. and Survey No.316 admeasuring 6576 sq. mtrs. situated in Village Godhavi, Taluka Sanand, District Ahmedabad, was originally owned by original Defendant No.1. Defendant No.1 has executed power of attorney in favour of Defendant No.2 with respect to the aforesaid lands. Pursuant to the said power of attorney, Defendant No.2-power of attorney holder, executed a registered agreement to sell dated 28th October, 1996 bearing No.2306 with possession in favour of one Shri Swapnilbhai Arvindbhai Doshi, now deceased, happened to be the husband of original plaintiff No.1 and father of original plaintiff Nos.2 and 3.
2.2 Said Swapnilbhai Doshi expired on 21st November, 2003.
An agreement to sell does not confer any legal right until formally executed; merely having such an agreement without a registered sale deed leaves no interest to sue third parties.
Valid sale deeds can only be challenged through competent court orders; transactions executed in violation of interim injunctions are treated as void.
An agreement to sell does not confer any interest in property, and a suit for injunction is not maintainable when title is disputed and the plaintiffs lack personal interest.
A suit is filed with ....
An agreement to sell is not void ab initio if it is subject to a condition that the seller will obtain the necessary permission from the authorities to convert the land from new tenure to old tenure ....
A suit filed more than three years post-execution of a sale-deed is barred by limitation regardless of claims of security, emphasizing the necessity of timely legal action.
Unregistered agreements do not confer rights in property; a valid title requires a registered sale deed under Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act.
Only a registered sale deed conveys ownership; unregistered documents such as Agreements to Sell do not confer rights in property, making a suit based on them subject to rejection.
A suit challenging a sale deed must be filed within the limitation period; failure to do so results in the suit being barred.
The court ruled that the rejection of the plaint was erroneous as it did not consider the merits of the case, emphasizing that the issue of limitation is a mixed question of law and fact.
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
