An unregistered Sale Deed does not convey property title, and the burden of proof lies on the appellant to establish ownership.

J U D G M E N T

The unsuccessful plaintiff in the suit is the appellant.

2. The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit properties. The deceased defendant- Selvaraj filed counter claim seeking declaration of title, recovery of possession and also for recovery of custody of original title documents from the plaintiff. The Trial Court dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiff and decreed the counter claim as prayed for. Aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff filed an appeal and the same was dismissed by the First Appellate Court. Aggrieved by the concurrent finding, the plaintiff has come before this Court.

3. According to the plaintiff, the suit property originally belonged to the deceased defendant-Selvaraj, his brother. He sold the suit properties to the plaintiff on 10.12.1980 under the unregistered Sale Deed and handed over possession. From that date onwards, the plaintiff claims to have been in possession and enjoyment of the suit properties. It was also stated that Patta and other revenue documents issued in the name of the plaintiff. Later, the relationship between the plaintiff and deceased defendant-Selvaraj got strained and the defendant attempted to interfere with possession of the plaintiff. Hence, the above said suit was filed seeking declaration of title and permanent injunction.

4. The deceased defendant-Selvaraj field a written statement and denied the execution of unregistered Sale Deed relied on by the plaintiff. It was the specific case of the deceased defendant-Selvaraj that the unregistered Sale Deed was a forged one and created for got the properties.

5. As far as patta and other revenue documents produced by the plaintiff are concerned, the deceased defendant-Selvaraj pleaded that those revenue documents were recent documents and hence, it would not confer any right to the plaintiff over the suit properties. It was also claimed by the defendant that he purchased the property under two different Sale Deeds dated 25.04.1980 and 20.09.1980 for the valuable consideration in his own name and there was no necessity for him to convey the suit properties to the plaintiff within eight months. It was also claimed by the defendant that the plaintiff trespassed into the suit properties and hence, he approached the Mediator and during mediation, the title documents were handed over to the Mediators. The plaintiff in the guise of verifying the documents got possession of the title documents of the defendant from the Mediators. On these pleadings, the deceased defendant-Selvaraj filed counter claim and sought for declaration of title, recovery of possession of the suit properties and also recovery of custody of the title deeds in the hands of the plaintiff.

6. The counter claim filed by the defendant was resisted by the plaintiff by filing a reply statement by relying on the unregistered Sale Deed dated 10.12.1980.

7. The Trial Court based on the pleadings of the parties, formulated the following issues for consideration:-

1) tHf;F brhj;J Fwpj;J thjp nfhhpa[s;sgo tpsk;g[if ghpfhuk;

tH';ff;Toajh ?

2) thjp nfhhpa[s;sgo epue;ju cWj;Jf;fl;lis ghpfhuk; tH';ff;Toajh ?

3) tHf;fpy; fpilf;ff;Toa ,ju ghpfhuk; vd;d ?

8. Before the Trial Court, the plaintiff was examined as PW.1 and one Mani, who said to be the Scribe of Ex.A1 was examined as PW.2. On behalf of the plaintiff, 8 documents were marked as Exs.A1 to A8. The defendant was examined as DW.1 and he has not marked any document on his side.

9. The Trial Court on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence available on recor