IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Easwaran S., J
Ramadevi – Appellant
Versus
Sameer A – Respondent
RSA NO. 189 OF 2025 | AS NO.134 OF 2018 | OS NO.39 OF 2013
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff challenged a document's intent without seeking cancellation. (Para 1) |
| 2. executants must seek cancellation of deeds for validity challenges. (Para 2 , 3) |
JUDGMENT
The plaintiff has filed a suit for a declaration that the documents executed by her in the year 2012 were never intended to be acted upon as executed and were only intended as security for the transaction. Both courts have concurrently found against the plaintiff. Though several contentions were raised by the learned counsel for the appellant, this Court finds that the plaintiff has only sought a declaration that the documents executed by her were not intended to be a sale deed but were instead intended as security for the loan transaction, and therefore she has not prayed for setting aside the documents.
2. In Suhrid Singh alias Sardool Singh VS Randhir Singh and others (2010) 12 SCC 112, it was held that when the executant of a document seeks to avoid or invalidate the document , a mere declaration is insufficient and the executant must seek cancellation of the document along with the consequential relief.
3. Admittedly, the appellant/plaintiff has not sought cancellation of the document executed by her. That be so, the findings rendered by the courts below do not call for any interference. Resultantly, the appeal is dismissed finding that no substantial questions are raised for consideration.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.