SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(P&H) 3339

2006 (4) LAW HERALD 3262 (P&H)
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Before
MAHESH GROVER, J.
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1131 OF 2004
22.08.2006
Manga Singh
Appellant
Vs.
Guman Singh and others
Respondents

For the defendant-appellant :Mr. D.S. Bali, Senior Advocate with Pramod Kmar, Advocate.
For the plaintiffs-respondents:Mr. Mr. M.S. Jain, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Adarsh Jain, Mr. Anil Kumar Sahani, Advocates.

IMPORTANT POINT
Part performance - Doctrine of part performance is to be used as a sword and not a shield.

Headnote:Registration Act, 1908 - Section 17 - Registration of documents - Unregistered documents of which registration is compulsory - Unregistered sale deed - It can be at par with that of a contract or an agreement to sell wherein right was proposed to be transferred to the plaintiffs. (Para 18)

       Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Section 53-A - Part performance - Unregistered sale deed - There has to be substantial and cogent evidence to show that performance was carried out in execution of a valid contract between the parties. (Para 24)

       Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Section 53-A - Part performance - Doctrine of part performance is to be used as a sword and not a shield. (Para 24)

       Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Section 41 - Transfer by ostensible owner - Bonafide purchaser - Appellant was not having any knowledge of any previous sale deed which was an unregistered document - Not reflected in the revenue records - Appellant having registered sale deed in his favour which was executed for a valid consideration - Appellant is held to be a bonafide purchaser - Entitled to protection of the provision of Section 41 of the Act. (Para 26 and 27)

       

JUDGMENT

MAHESH GROVER, J.

1. The facts of the case, in brief, are that one Birkha son of Risal Singh was the owner of the land to the extent of 1/2 share of 361 kanals and 10 marlas. After his death, his share was inherited by his widow-Smt. Rumali (respondent no.13) and his four minor daughters, namely, Bala, Bimla, Bohati and Kamla (respondent nos. 14 to 17). Bala and Bohati have since died. Kehar Singh (respondent no.12) was appointed as General Power of Attorney by Smt. Rumali to act on her behalf and on behalf of her minor daughters. Kehar Singh gave the suit land to one Santokh Singh, who was predecessor-in- interest of respondent nos. 4 to 11 (respondent no.4 has since died) for a period of ten years beginning from Kharif,1965 to Kharif,1975. Under the instructions of Smt. Rumali, Kehar Singh sold the suit land for Rs.9000/- to Guman Singh, Nidhan Singh and Gujjar Singh (respondent nos. 1 to 3 herein) and Santokh Singh. The sale deed was duly executed and Rs.9000/- were to be paid before the Sub Registrar at the time of its registration, but on the anointed day, Kehar Singh came to them and asked them to pay Rs.9000/- as he required the same for another transaction before the Sub Registrar. The amount was accordingly paid outside the office of the Sub Registrar. Thereafter, the sale deed remained unregistered. Santokh Singh was already in possession of the suit land as a lessee since 3.7.1965 and after the execution of the sale deed, he continued to be in possession as a prospective vendee. The sale deed could not be registered as Kehar Singh did not turn up to get the same registered.

2. On 11.2.1971, Kehar Singh sold the suit land to Manga Singh, defendant-appellant for an ostensible consideration of Rs.90,000/- vide a registered sale deed. The other half share which was not in the share of Smt.Rumali and others was purchased from Man Singh and others by Guman Singh, Nidhan Singh and Gujjar Singh along with their brother Phoola vide registered sale deed dated 30.1.1969.

3. In their suit filed for declaration and consequential relief of permanent injunction, Guman Singh, Nidhan Singh, Gujjar Singh and legal representatives of Santokh Singh had pleaded that they were always ready and willing to perform their part of contract and Kehar Singh kept on telling them that they need not worry about the registration of sale deed. The plaintiffs- respondents claimed that they were entitled to the protection of the provisions of Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act (for short, ‘the Act’). The plaintiffs pleaded that the appellant had purchased the suit land with open eyes knowing fully well that Kehar Singh had already sold it and had received Rs.9000/- and, therefore, he was not a bona fide purchaser for valuable consideration.

4. The defendant-appellant along with Kehar Singh contested the suit by filing one written statement, while Smt.Rumali and her daughters, Bimla, Bohati and Kamla filed separate written statement. The fourth daughter of Smt.Rumali, namely, Bala did not choose to contest the suit.

5. In their written statement, the defendant-appellant and Kehar Singh alleged that the suit was collusive and has been filed at the behest of Smt.Rumali and her daughters and that the plaintiffs had no right on the suit property as neither the execution of the sale deed was established nor it was registered and that even if it is presumed that there was some contract between Smt.Rumali and the plaintiffs, then, they were estopped from filing the present suit by their own conduct as they never filed a suit for specific performance for enforcement of the contract in their favour. It was further contended that the appellant had purchased the suit land for a consideration of Rs.90,000/- on the strength of a registered sale deed by paying the market value for the same and that he was bona fide purchaser for consideration without any notice and, therefore, the sale in his favour was protected by the provisions of Section 41 of






















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top