An unregistered sale-deed does not transfer title and cannot support a claim of adverse possession; possession must be open and hostile to the true owner's title.

ORDER :

1. This second appeal under Section 100 of C.P.C. has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 28/11/2001 passed by II Additional District Judge, Vidisha in Civil Appeal No.29-A/2000 arising out of judgment and decree dated 03/07/2000 passed by II Civil Judge Class II, Vidisha in Civil Suit No.233-A/1997.

2. The appellant is the plaintiff, who has lost his case from both the Courts below.

3. This second appeal was admitted on the following substantial question of law:-

"Whether defendant's possession based on title through unregistered sale-deed, was permissive and the Courts below erred in law in holding it adverse possession and if so, if the judgment and decree of the Courts below are illegal?"

4. The facts necessary for disposal of present appeal, in short, are that appellant/plaintiff filed a suit for possession, permanent injunction as well as mesne profit at the rate of Rs.100/- per month.

5. It is the case of plaintiff that the house, which is shown in the suit map, is situated in Madankhedi, Tahsil and District Vidisha which is the disputed property. A part of the house, which is marked as A, B, C, D, consist of two rooms and a corridor belonging to plaintiff. The relationship between plaintiff and defendant was good, and since, defendant was in need of money, therefore, he had sold his house to one Dheeraj Singh and, therefore, he had requested plaintiff to allow him to keep his belongings in the disputed property till either he constructs his new house or makes alternative arrangement. The disputed property was lying vacant and accordingly, plaintiff accepted the request made by defendant and granted licence to defendant to store some of his belongings. Later on, the relationship between plaintiff and defendant deteriorated, and accordingly, plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction against the defendant, which has been registered as Case No.211-A/1967 and is pending before the Court of Civil Judge Class-I, District Vidisha. As the defendant got annoyed on account of institution of suit, therefore, now, he is out-and-out to alienate the disputed property and has also refused to vacate the same. It was pleaded that in case if disputed property is sold by defendant, then plaintiff would suffer irreparable loss and, therefore, the suit was filed for possession as well as for permanent injunction and mesne profit at the rate of Rs.100/- per month.

6. Defendant filed his written statement and denied that disputed property belongs to plaintiff. In special plea, it was stated by defendant that on 15/11/1973, defendant had purchased the disputed property for a consideration amount of Rs.800/- and an unregistered sale-deed was executed because it was agreed that the registration expenses will be borne by plaintiff and since, he was not in possession of said expenses, therefore, the sale-deed was not executed. Earlier, the house was a ruin which has been reconstructed by defendant. Plaintiff had lost his title over the property in dispute from the year 1973. Thus, in nutshell, it was the case of defendant that by virtue of an unregistered document Ex.D-1, he has become the owner of the property in dispute and is in possession thereof.

7. The trial Court after framing issues and recording evidence, dismissed the suit.

8. Being aggrieved by judgment and decree dated 03/07/2000 passed by trial Court, appellant preferred an appeal, which too has been dismissed by the Appellate Court by judgment and decree dat