A sale deed is void if the stated consideration has not been paid, rendering it a nullity, regardless of recitals in the deed; no rights transfer without valid consideration.

JUDGMENT :

ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, J.

1. This first appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 31.05.2023 (decree signed on 09.06.2023) passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division) III, Jamshedpur in Original Suit No. 212 of 2016, whereby the learned court has dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiffs.

2. The suit was filed for the following reliefs:-

(a) For passing appropriate order directing the defendant to return original copy of registered Sale deeds as mentioned above to the Plaintiff as because the aforementioned two sale deeds no. 705/508 dated 07.02.2014 and no. 2736/2125 dated 17.05.2014 are itself null and void.

(b) For cost.

(c) Your any other relief or reliefs to which the plaintiffs are found entitled thereto according to law and equity.

3. The details of the properties have been mentioned in four schedules and the disputed property is relatable to Schedule-II and III of the plaint and both are admittedly part of Schedule-I property. Schedule II relates to sale deed no. 705/508 dated 07.02.2014 and Schedule III relates to sale deed no. 2736/2125 dated 17.05.2014. Schedule IV is part of schedule II and III.

4. It is not in dispute that the plaintiffs were the owner of Schedule I property and it is also not in dispute that aforesaid sale deeds dated 07.02.2014 and 17.05.2014 were executed by the plaintiffs in favour of the sole defendant.

5. The case of the plaintiffs was that no consideration had passed pursuant to the two sale deeds as the cheques mentioned therein were returned to the defendant at the insistence of the defendant and hence the sale deeds were null and void and the plaintiffs were entitled to return of the registered sale deeds, which were collected by the defendant from the registry office on the basis of registration slips, which were handed over by the plaintiffs to the defendant in good faith upon registration of the sale deeds but the cheques were returned by the plaintiffs to the defendant at the insistence of the defendant subsequent to the registration of the sale deeds. On the other hand, the case of the defendant is that it was agreed that the plaintiffs would encash the cheques mentioned in the sale deeds only after the property is mutated in the name of the defendant but mutation was refused by the concerned authority on the ground that the property belongs to the State of Jharkhand and hence the cheques were returned by the plaintiffs, but the entire consideration amount was paid by the defendant to the plaintiffs or their relatives upon instructions of the plaintiffs, partly through cash and partly through bank transactions.

6. The following issues were framed by the learned Trial Court:-

i. Whether the suit is maintainable in its present form?

ii. Whether the plaintiff has any valid cause of action for the suit?

iii. Whether suit is barred by principle of waiver, estoppel an acquiescence?

iv. Whether suit is barred under the provisions of T.P. Act and Specific Relief Act?

v. Whether the suit is undervalued or properly valued?

vi. Whether the present suit is bad in law owing to withdrawal of Title Suit No