1981 Supreme(MP) 467

J. S. Verma, J.
Narendra Nath Thakur v. Mukutram.
S. A. No. 182 of 1975 (J); Decided on 25-8-1981.

Headnote:Transfer of Property Act, 1882 -- S. 54 -- transfer of title under sale deed -- depends upon intention of parties -- intention to pass title on payment of consideration -- consideration not paid -- title not passed even the deed is registered.

        The suit of the plaintiff is for possession of some lands on the basis of title claimed under the sale deed (Ex. P-1) dated 12-5-1964 for Rs. 3,000/- executed by Baiju in favour of the plaintiff. Admittedly Baiju was owner of the suit lands Defendants are the heirs of Baiju. The defence to the suit was that the sale-deed did not convey any title to the plaintiff inasmuch as only Rs. 100/- was paid by the plaintiff to Baiju and the remaining consideration of Rs. 2,900/- was not paid as a result of which Baiju refused to get the sale-deed registered, the sale-deed was presented for registration by the plaintiff on 31-7-1964 and in reply to the notice of Registrar Baiju appeared and refused to get it regisered on account of non-payment of most of the consideration, that even then the sale-deed was registered on 14-8-64 In short, the defence was that no title was to pass to the vender till payment of the sale consideration which had not been made and, therefore, the sale-deed which was registered in this manner in spite of refusal of Baiju did not convey any title to the plaintiff.

        Held : The only contention of learned counsel for the appellant is that the seller had the only right of recovering consideration but non-payment of consideration did not arrest transfer of title which took place as a result of registration of the sale-deed. There is no merit in this contention. It is settled as was also held in Sukaloo Bassari Satnami and another v. Punau Bodhan Satnami (1961 JLJ 138). that the transfer of title under a sale-deed depends on the intention of parties and where the intention was the to convey title only on payment of consideration, no title passes till the consideration had been paid. In the present case it has been clearly found that the consideration of Rs. 2,900/- out of the total sum of Rs. 3,000/- was not paid by plaintiff to Baiju and it was for this reason that Baiju refused to get the sale-deed registered, but even then the registrar registered the sale-deed after refusal of Baiju. There can be no doubt the intention of parties to convey title in the present case only on payment of the full consideration which was admittedly not paid. There is thus no infirmity in the conclusion of the Courts below that no title was acquired by the plaintiff under the sale-deed which he got registered under these circumstances in spite of refusal of Baiju to get the same registered. The plaintiffs suit for possession of the lands was, accordingly, rightly dismissed. 1961 JLJ 138 relied on. Appeal dismissed.