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

2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 21203

HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J
K.DORAISAMY – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR – Respondent



A settlement deed cannot be unilaterally canceled unless specific revocation rights are included within the deed itself.

Headnote:

Cancellation - Settlement Deed - Tamil Nadu Welfare and Maintenance of Parents and Senior Citizens Act - Section 31 of Specific Relief Act, Section 126 of Transfer of Property Act - The court analyzed the validity of unilateral cancellation of a settlement deed and ruled that without explicit revocation rights, such a cancellation is legally unsustainable.

Fact of the Case:

A writ petition was filed to cancel a document unilaterally cancelling a settlement deed executed in favor of the petitioner. The petitioner claimed possession based on the original settlement deed and contested the legality of its unilateral cancellation by the third respondent.

Issues: Whether the unilateral cancellation of a settlement deed executed in favor of the petitioner is valid under law.

Ratio Decidendi: Unilateral cancellation of a validly executed settlement deed is impermissible unless the deed provides for express revocation rights, thereby upholding the enforced nature of executed settlements.

Final Decision: The cancellation deed dated 06.03.2013 is set aside.

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents to cancel the document dated 06.03.2013 registered as Document No.3378/13, on the file of Sub Registrar, Palladam and remove the entries made in the encumbrance.

2. It is the grievance of the writ petitioner that the petitioner's father had executed a settlement deed in favour of the petitioner on 22.05.2009. Pursuant to the said settlement deed, the petitioner is in possession of the property and all of a sudden, the said settlement deed has been cancelled unilaterally on 06.03.2013 by the third respondent. Not stopping with that, he has also given a complaint before the Revenue Divisional Officer for maintenance. The Revenue Divisional Officer has directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month with a right to residence till lifetime. That order has been challenged by the father of the petitioner before the District Collector, Tiruppur. On 08.09.2021, an ex-parte order was passed. However, according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the unilateral cancellation of the document cannot be sustained in the eye of law.

3. The third respondent, despite service of notice and his name has been printed in the cause list, has not chosen to appear before the court, either in person or through counsel.

4. As far as unilateral cancellation of settlement is concerned, it is well settled that once a settlement deed was executed and the passing of title is immediate, the settlor already divested the title, he will not retain any right over the property, which has already been settled. Therefore, unless the right of revocation is reserved in the settlement deed, the settlement deed cannot be cancelled unilaterally. The only exception is Tamil Nadu Welfare and Maintenance of Parents and Senior Citizens Act . Therein also, when the settlement is executed only for the purpose of maintaining the senior citizens and the same is not acted upon, such a document can be cancelled. In such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that unilateral cancellation of the settlement by executing a cancellation deed is not permissible under law. Further, the Full Bench of this court in a decision in Sasikala vs. Revenue Divisional Officer cum Sub Collector and another made in W.P.(MD).Nos.6889 of 2020 etc., batch cases dated 02.09.2022 has held as follows :

"44. From the discussions and conclusions we have reached above with reference to various provisions of Statutes and precedents, we reiterate the dictum of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Thota Ganga Laxmi and Ors. vs Government of Andhra Pradesh & Ors., reported in (2010) 15 SCC 207 and the Full Bench of this Court in Latif Estate Line India Ltd., case, reported in AIR 2011(Mad) 66 and inclined to follow the judgment of three member Bench of Hon-ble Supreme Court in Veena Singh's case reported in (2022) 7 SCC 1 and the judgment of two member Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd., case, reported in 2022 SCC On-line SC 544 for the following propositions:

(a) A sale deed or a deed of conveyance other than testamentary dispositions which is executed and registered cannot be unilaterally cancelled.

(b) Such unilateral cancellation of sale deed or a deed of conveyance is wholly void and non est and does not operate to execute, assign, limit or extinguish any right, title or interest in the property.

(c) Such unilateral cancellation of sale deed or deed of conveyance cannot be accepted for registration.

(d) The transferee or any one claiming under him or her need not approach the civil Court and a Writ Petition is maintainable to challenge or nullify the registration.

(e) However, an absolute deed of sale or deed of conveyance which is duly executed by the transferor may be cancelled by the Civil Court at the instance of transferor as contemplated under Section 31 of Specific Relief Act.

(f) As regards gift or settlement deed, a deed of revocation or cancellation is permissible

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 Back to top