Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.DHANABAL
V. Dasappan (Died) – Appellant
Versus
Marayammal (died) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ownership and interest in property after death (Para 4 , 5) |
| 2. validity of sale deed and legal provisions (Para 6 , 9 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. procedural requirements for evidence admission (Para 8 , 10 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. remand for reconsideration of appeal (Para 17) |
JUDGMENT :
1. This Second Appeal has been preferred as against the Decree and Judgment passed in n A.S.No.81 of 2020 on the file of the First Additional District Judge, Salem.
3. For the sake of convenience and brevity, the parties herein are referred as plaintiffs and defendants, as referred before the trial court.
4.1. The suit properties were originally belonged to one Dasappa Chettiar and the said Dasappa Chettiar died intestate leaving behind his five sons and thereafter, the family properties were divided through the partition deed dated 01.07.1934 and through that partition, the properties were allotted to the sons of Dasappa Chettiar, namely, Ellappa Chettiar and Venkatappa Chettiar. The said Ellapa Chettiar and Venkatapa Chettiar had divided their properties through the partition deed dated 16.02.1944. The suit properties were allotted to Venkatapa Chettiar and he was in possession and enjoyment of the
Sale deeds executed by life estate holders without alienation rights are invalid; due process requires opportunity to rebut additional evidence in appellate hearings.
The sale deed executed without valid payment consideration is deemed sham, preventing any title transfer, establishing that property ownership remains with original heirs under the valid Will.
Mere entries in revenue records do not confer title; to maintain a suit for declaration, a party must also seek possession.
A declaration of property ownership requires establishing possession; without it, claims regarding related deeds are insufficient.
A sale deed is deemed null and void if the vendor lacks valid title to the property sold, as established by the auction process under the Financial Corporation Act.
The court ruled that plaintiffs failed to prove a mortgage, and the property was validly sold, negating their claims to the property as heirs.
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
