A suit cannot proceed on the basis of unregistered sale deeds as they do not constitute valid evidence for proving title under the Transfer of Property Act and Registration Act.

ORDER :

V.Lakshminarayanan, J.

The Civil Revision Petition arises against the order passed by the learned IV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai.

2. The civil revision petitioner is the defendant in the suit. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as plaintiff and defendant.

3. The suit in O.S.No.1760 of 2019 was presented by the plaintiff seeking for the following relief:

a) declaration, declaring that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the suit schedule A and B properties.

4. The claim of the plaintiff is that she has been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property from the year 1993. The plaintiff pleaded that her unlettered mother had entered into an agreement of sale with one Singaraj, who had handed over possession of the property to her. The plaintiff further pleads that on 10.02.1995, her mother had purchased the property for valuable consideration. Subsequently, the mother of the plaintiff had put up a superstructure over the said property and was residing therein. On 02.12.2001, the mother of the plaintiff is said to have sold the property to the plaintiff. On the strength of her possession, the plaintiff had obtained an address proof ID from the Postal Department on 08.04.2017. She pleaded she had opened a bank account with M/s.Indian Overseas Bank on 12.05.2017. She had also secured an Indane Gas Connection in her name. For the purpose of Electricity Connection, she filed W.P.No.27924 of 2018 and obtained an order. On the strength of the said order, she obtained electricity connection also. She pleaded that her possession was interfered with by the defendant, who claimed that he is the absolute owner of the property and attempted to dispossess her on 06.02.2019, when he came to the premises along with his henchmen. Hence, she filed a suit for the aforesaid relief.

5. Along with the plaint, the plaintiff produced three documents claiming title. They are three unregistered sale deeds dated 10.02.1995, 02.12.2001 and 30.09.2016. The remaining documents are the address proof, the bank passbook, LPG receipt and Electricity Board Consumption Card together with deposit receipt.

6. On being served with the summons, the defendant took out an application for rejection of the plaint. He pleaded that between one P.P.R.Hariharan and his father, proceedings have been initiated before this Court in W.P.No.4112 of 1989. Another writ petition had also been filed in W.P.No.3823 of 1989. This Court clubbed W.P.No.3823 along with W.P.No.4112 of 1989 and pronounced a common order on 18.08.1989.

7. In that writ petition, the relief that had been sought for by the father of the civil revision petitioner, namely one Mir Askar Hussain, was police protection to remove the encroacher P.P.R.Hariharan. The writ petition was dismissed leaving it open for the writ petitioner to seek the same remedy through civil forum. The writ petition filed by Mr.P.P.R.Hariharan came to be dismissed as well. Subsequently, the parties moved to the civil forum and filed O.S.No.500 of 1990 before the City Civil Court at Chennai. The said suit was dismissed on 19.07.1999.

8. In the mean time, the defendant's predecessor in title had filed the suit on the Original Side of this Court in C.S.No.475 of 1991. That suit was for the relief of declaration of title, permanent injunction and for delivery of possession. The suit was transferred to the file of the City Civil Court at Chennai and re-numbered as O.S.No.7335 of 1996. The said suit was decreed declaring the title of the defendant's father.

9. The defendant herein pointed out that the decree holders had presented E.P.No.90 of 2007 to take delivery of possession. The judgment debtors therein had pres