Unilateral revocation of a settlement deed without mutual consent or timely challenge lacks legal validity.

JUDGMENT

The dispute involved in the suit is pertaining to the validity of a revocation deed (cancellation deed), Ext.A4, executed on 29.01.2008 by the father cancelling the earlier settlement deed (gift deed), Ext.A3, dated 14.09.2007 in favour of his children. Admittedly, Ext.A4 revocation deed is a unilateral document executed by the father without the consent of the beneficiary under Ext.A3, that too without showing any sufficient reason for its cancellation. The document, Ext.A3, is brought under challenge on the ground that it is vitiated by fraud and undue influence exerted by his wife, hence stood vitiated. No challenge was raised against the said document before any court of competent jurisdiction till the lapse of a period of three years. In fact, no challenge was raised till today as against Ext.A3 or its validity or for a declaration or its cancellation or to set aside the same on any of the vitiating grounds available. It is now settled that a unilateral revocation/cancellation may not have any legal impact or legal consequence except to the extent that it would admit the due execution of the earlier document covered by the said cancellation. The remedy, if any, available to the plaintiffs' father was not exhausted within the period of limitation or till today. The declaration sought by the plaintiffs is that Ext.A3 is valid and unilateral cancellation of Ext.A4 is ab initio void and not binding on them or their right over the property. Interim injunction was also sought not to use Ext.A4 revocation to create any transfer or encumbrance over the property. But, the learned Sub Judge without knowing the actual dispute involved, without perusing the respective contention raised by the parties and without having a proper understanding with respect to the dispute involved, had gone into the question of existence of the property covered by Ext.A3 and a declaration was granted with respect to item Nos.2 and 3 and found that item No.1 is not available. I am at a loss to understand what actually prompted the learned Sub Judge to go into those questions, unless it was raised in a properly instituted suit. The dispute involved in the present suit is pertaining to the legal validity of a cancellation deed, Ext.A4. Further, in so far as the property included in Ext.A3 document is concerned, when it was not challenged within the period of limitation by the executant on any of the vitiating grounds, it would stand binding on him. Everything attached to the said document and every legal consequences also would stand binding on him. In fact, that question is not available for adjudication in this suit. The trial court has committed a grave error and hence the decree and judgment of the trial court are liable to be set aside. The appeal is hence allowed by declaring that Ext.A4 document is not binding on the plaintiffs or their right under the properties covered by Ext.A3 document and it shall not be used by the defendant for creating any encumbrance/transfer with respect to any interest, title or possession and if any made will not have any legal validity. Permanent injunction is granted accordingly. The suit is hence decreed in toto as above.

RFA No.23/2012 is allowed accordingly. No costs.

2. RFA No.7/2012 is filed by the defendant with respect to the finding rendered by the trial court with respect to item Nos.2 and 3 covered by Ext.A3 document.

Necessarily, the appeal will stand dismissed in view of the decree granted in the suit in favour of the plaintiffs which is the subject of RFA No.23/2012. Hence, RFA No.7/2012 will stand dismissed.

WPC No.24416/2014 is against the receipt of tax by the Village Officer pertaining to the property covered by Ext.A3 document and not pertaining to any building tax payable to any local authority. It is also submitted that steps were taken to mutate the property and hence the issue is left open for consideration by the Village Officer in accordance with the law in force based on the document of ti