A sale of property is not void even if there is a contravention of Section 31(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, as the Act does not provide that the title in the property does not pass to the purchaser in case of such contravention.

1. This judgement will dispose of R.F.A. No. 1817 of 1978, R.S.A. No. 1210 of 1982 and Civil Miscellaneous Applications Nos. 885-CI and 886-CI of 1986.

2. The facts as given in R.F.A. No. 1817 of 1978 are that Piara Singh was the owner of shop-cum-flat No. 21, Sector 26, Grain Market, Chandigarh. The plaintiffs purchase the said Flat from him for a consideration of Rs. 75,000/- on 22-11-1971. It is alleged that the defendant delivered possession of the ground floor to them on the same day which was let out by them to one Gulshan Rai Sapra. However, the defendant could not give vacant possession of the first and second floors of the building to them and consequently, he agreed to pay the rent at the rate of Rs. 400/- per mensem to them. They filed an eviction petition against the defendant regarding first and second floors of the building in which the defendant took a plea that there existed no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties and that he was a trespasser in the building. Consequently, they filed a suit for possession of the first and second floors of the building and for recovery of Rs. 14,000/- as damages for use and occupation with effect from 1-7-1973 till 30-6-1976 at the rate of Rs. 400/- per mensem.

3. The suit was contested by the defendant, who, inter alia, pleaded that the property was in fact sold by him for a consideration of Rs. 1,50,000/- to the plaintiffs but the sale deed was got executed in favour of the plaintiffs for a consideration of Rs. 75,000/-, as they had no money to pay the balance amount. The plaintiffs father Prem Singh had agreed to pay balance amount of Rs. 75,000/- within a year and for that purpose he executed a document dt. 25-11-1971. It is further averred that their father agreed that if the remaining amount was not paid within the stipulated period, the sale deed would stand cancelled. The defendant further took a plea that the sale consideration had been brought to India by the father of the plaintiffs in contravention of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act and, therefore, the sale was void. Some other pleas were also taken but they do not survive in the appeal.

4. The learned trial Court held that whole of the building was sold by the defendant to the plaintiffs for a consideration of Rs. 75,000/- and the document alleged to have been executed by the father of the plaintiffs in favour of the defendant agreeing to pay Rs. 75,000/- more to him within one year and that if that amount was not paid within the stipulated period, the sale deed would stand cancelled, was not satisfactorily proved. It further held that no breach of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (referred to as the Act) had been established. The other pleas taken by the defendant were also rejected. Consequently, it decreed the suit for possession of the first and second floors of the building and for recovery of Rs. 14,000/-. The defendant has come up in appeal to this Court.

5. Mr. Anand Swaroop, learned counsel for the appellant, has argued that the sale consideration of the building was Rs. 1,50,000/- and not Rs. 75,000/-. Prem Singh father of the plaintiffs had agreed by a separate agreement to pay the amount of Rs. 75,000/- within a period of one year and in case he failed to do so, the sale deed would stand cancelled, and he would be entitled to retain possession of the building. He further submits that the agreement mark A has been duly proved and from the document the above facts stand established.

6. I have duly considered the argument but do find not any substance therein. The sale deed was executed by the defendant in favour of the respondents on 22-11-1971 wherein the sale consideration is mentioned as Rs. 75,000/-. The whole of the consideration was paid by Prem Singh on behalf of the plaintiffs to the defendant in the presence of the Sub-Registrar. There is no mention in the sale deed that the sale consideration was Rs. 1,50,000/- out of which Rs. 75,000/- has been paid and the balance woul