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)(CG) 2685

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
Arvind Kumar Verma, J
Balram – Appellant
Versus
Kamal Narayan & Another – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellant: Shri P.R.Patankar
For the Respondent: Shri B.P.Sharma

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - The sale deed executed without payment of consideration is void under Section 25 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. (!) (!) - The trial court’s decree declaring the sale deed null and void was affirmed on appeal. (!) (!) - The agreement to sell with no actual payment, executed on the same day as the sale deed, supports the finding of lack of consideration. (!) (!) - The court references that payment of price is an essential element of a sale; without payment, the sale is void. (!) (!) - The evidentiary approach adopts the civil standard of proof "preponderance of probability" to determine lack of consideration and title implications. (!) - Substantial evidence showed that no sale consideration was paid and possession was handed over, aligning with voidance of the sale deed. (!) (!) (!) - The appellant’s contention that full consideration was paid was rejected based on documentary and witness evidence. (!) (!) (!) - The appellate court upheld the conclusion that the sale deed was executed without consideration and was void. (!) (!)

What is the effect of executing a sale deed without payment of consideration under the Indian Contract Act, 1872 as addressed in this judgment?

What is the court's finding regarding the validity of a sale deed where no sale consideration was paid and the agreement to sell was executed on the same day?

What are the standard of proof and evidentiary considerations applied to establish lack of consideration in a civil suit for sale of immovable property?


Table of Content
1. facts establishing the void sale deed due to lack of payment. (Para 2 , 5 , 6)
2. arguments regarding the validity of considerations and evidence. (Para 8 , 9)
3. court's legal reasoning on proof standards for civil cases. (Para 10 , 18)
4. conclusion on the overall dismissal of the appeal. (Para 20 , 21)
JUDGEMENT

Post for pronouncement of the judgment dated 08 /05/2024 (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge 06 /05/2024 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR JUDGMENT RESERVED ON 08.04.2024 JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON 08.05.2024 FA No. 119 of 2012 • Balram S/o Guhri Ram Sahu Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Kurdi, Tahsil Gunderdehi, District Durg, Chhattisgarh ---- Appellant Versus

1. Kamal Narayan (Dead) Through LRs Nil, Chhattisgarh 1a. Sanjay Chandrakar S/o Kamal Narayan Aged About 40 Years R/o Maitri Nagar, Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh 1b.Vijay Chandrakar S/o Kamal Narayan Aged About 44 Years R/o Shop No.3, VIP Nagar, Risali Sector Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh 1c. Smt. Tarun Chandrakar D/o Late Kamal Narayan Chandrakar Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Chourel, Post Chourel, P.S. Arjunda, Tahsil Gunderdehi, District Balod, Chhattisgarh 1d. Smt. Ka

              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 telegram-icon
              whatsapp-icon Back to top