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

2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 15077

HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Honourable Ms. Justice P.T. ASHA
RAJASEKARAN – Appellant
Versus
CHANDRA DEVI JHABAK – Respondent



Fraudulent documents, including forgeries, do not confer valid title or ownership in property transactions.

Headnote:

Fraud - Sale Deed - Null and Void - Court discusses the legal implications of forged signatures in property transactions and affirms that such fraudulent documents confer no title, supporting the plaintiff's claim of ownership.

Fact of the Case:

A disputes arose over property ownership where the plaintiff claimed ownership via a sale deed executed by the power of attorney of the original owner. The defendants asserted ownership through allegedly forged transactions.

Issues: The key issues included whether the third defendant was a bona fide purchaser and if the sale deeds executed by the defendants were valid given the allegations of forgery.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that forged documents cannot confer any title to property, and since the original sale from the power of attorney to the plaintiff was valid, the defendants' claims were rejected.

Final Decision: The appeal is dismissed.

JUDGEMENT

The third defendant, who remained ex-parte in the trial Court, is the appellant before this Court.

2. The facts that have culmin ated in filing of this first appeal are briefly set out herein below. For the sake of easy understanding, the parties are referred to in the same ranking as before the trial Court.

3. The plaintiff had filed the suit O.S.No.121 of 2010 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Tiruvallur at Poonamalle seeking the following reliefs:

    (i) (a) that the sale deed dated 6.3.2006 under document No.1339/2006 registered with the SRO Avadi by the 2nd defendant in the capacity of the power agent of 1 st defendant in favour of the 4 th defendant by forging the signature of the 2nd defendant is null and void, (b) that the sale deed dated 1.11.2006 under document No.9304/2006 executed by the 4th defendant on the strength of created sale deed dated 6.3.2006 under document No.1339/2006 in favour of the 3rd defendant as null and void, and also praying.
    (c) the vacant possession of A' schedule property to the plaintiff, (d) a permanent injunction against the 3rd defendant from in any manner alienating or encumbering the suit properties to any parties.
    (e) a mandatory injunction directing the defendants to hand over all the original deeds pertaining to the suit schedule properties.
    (f) a sum of Rs.1,80,000/- as damages for user and occupation of the schedule mentioned properties at the rate of Rs.5,000/-per month from 17.7.2006 till the date of filing of the suit.
    (g) that the defendants have to pay a sum of Rs.60,000/- towards compensation for a period of one year from the date of suit and future compensation at the same rate till the property is delivered to the plaintiff, (h) praying a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as damages for mental agony suffered by the plaintiff (ii) and in case if this court is not able to grant the reliefs prayed in para No.l, 'a' to 'h' and without prejudice to the claim of the plaintiff in para No.1, plaintiff is praying that the defendants have to refund a sum of Rs.4,50,000/-which the plaintiff has paid to the 2nd defendant as consideration and also praying a sum of Rs.62,000/- towards registration charges and also praying a sum of Rs.12,30,000/- as compensation for breach of contract as alternative reliefs and also praying the cost of the suit.

4. The following is the property in question: SCHEDULE -"A" Item No.1 All that Ground/land and building bearing Door No.18, 7th Street, Kamaraj Nagar, situate in Paleripattu Village, comprised in Survey No.1/1 Poonamallee Taluk, Trivellore District, measuring 1,600 sq.ft.

(tax assessment No.5120) bounded on North by : Govindammal Plot South by :7th Cross Street East by: Ponnuswamy's House & Land and West by: Land belonging to Sivaraman 4. PLAINTIFF'S CASE:

    (i) It is the case of the plaintiff that the first defendant was the owner of the “A” schedule property under two registered Sale deeds both dated 03.09.1988. The first defendant had appointed the second defendant as her Power of Attorney Agent under a registered Power of Attorney bearing Document No.30/2000 on the file of the Sub Registrar Office, Avadi dated 19.01.2000.
    (ii) It is the further case of the plaintiff that she was approached by the second defendant with an offer that the “A” schedule property was up for sale. Under a registered Sale deed dated 17.07.2006, the plaintiff has purchased the property from the first defendant through her Power of Attorney Agent, the second defendant for a total sale consideration of Rs.4,50,000/-.
    (ii) The plaintiff would submit that on the date of the execution of the sale deed, the second defendant had informed her that the original documents were misplaced and that she would trace and handover the said documents to the plaintiff.
    (iii) The plaintiff would further submit that “A” schedule property was occupied by tenants and the second defendant had undertaken to vacate the tenants and handover the vacant possession of the suit schedule property to her. S

                                                                        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
                                                                        whatsapp-icon Back to top