Sale Deeds Executed Through Impersonation Are Null & Void, Cannot Confer Title: Delhi High Court - 2025-09-10

Delhi High Court Cancels Fraudulent Sale Deeds, Rules Impersonation Renders Transaction Void

New Delhi: In a significant judgment exposing a sophisticated property fraud, the Delhi High Court has declared three sale deeds null and void after finding that they were executed by a woman impersonating the rightful owner, a retired Lieutenant Colonel. Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora held that a transaction based on such fraud is non-est (does not exist in law) and cannot transfer any title, even to subsequent purchasers who may have acted in good faith.

The Court decreed the suit filed by Lt Col Dr Yasmin Yusufzai Retd, restoring her ownership of a property in Greater Kailash – I and cancelling the illegal deeds that had transferred her property to third parties without her knowledge.

---

Background of the Case: A Tenant's Elaborate Fraud

The case originated when Lt Col Dr Yasmin Yusufzai, the undisputed owner of a ground floor property and stilt area in Greater Kailash, filed a suit seeking cancellation of sale deeds executed in 2020. The plaintiff had rented her property to Mr. Awes Rajput (Defendant No. 1) in 2014. After disputes over rent and possession arose, Dr. Yusufzai filed a suit in Saket Court and obtained a possession decree against him in July 2020.

However, she later discovered that during the pendency of this litigation, Rajput had orchestrated an elaborate fraud. He arranged for a woman to impersonate Dr. Yusufzai and, using a forged copy of her original 2013 sale deed, executed a sale deed on July 9, 2020, in favour of Defendant No. 2. This transaction was then followed by two more sale deeds on July 29, 2020, transferring the property to the final purchasers, Defendants No. 3 and 4. The impersonator even acted as a witness in one of these subsequent transactions.

Court's Inquiry Unravels the Deception

The High Court took a proactive role in unearthing the fraud. Key findings emerged from inquiries directed by the court:

• District Magistrate's Report: An inquiry confirmed that the sale deed in Dr. Yusufzai's possession was genuine and matched the Sub-Registrar's records, while the one used by the defendants for the fraudulent transactions did not exist in official records and was a forgery.
• Joint Registrar's Findings: The court's Joint Registrar compared photographs, Aadhaar card details, and other documents, concluding that the woman who executed the 2020 sale deeds was not Dr. Yusufzai. The imposter had used the plaintiff's PAN and Aadhaar numbers but with a different address.
• Bank Account Evidence: The sale consideration was traced to a joint bank account opened by the tenant, Mr. Awes Rajput, and the impersonator just a month before the fraudulent sales, proving they were the direct beneficiaries of the crime.

Crucially, upon seeing the real Dr. Yusufzai in court for the first time, all subsequent purchasers (Defendants No. 2, 3, and 4) admitted that she was not the woman who had signed the sale deeds as the vendor.

Judgment Without Trial: Application of Order XV CPC

Relying on the unequivocal evidence from official inquiries and the admissions made by the defendants, the Court invoked its power under Order XV of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). This provision allows a court to pronounce a judgment at the first hearing if it finds that the parties are not at issue on any question of law or fact.

Justice Arora cited the precedent in A.N. Kaul v. Neerja Kaul , stating, "Thus even if there is no express admission in the written statement but an intelligent reading of the written statement shows the propositions or pleas taken to be not material and no issue to be arising therefrom, the Court is still entitled to pass a decree forthwith."

Given that the defendants conceded Dr. Yusufzai's ownership and the fact of her impersonation, the court concluded that no triable issue remained, and a full trial was unnecessary.

Final Decision and Directions

The Delhi High Court decreed the suit in favour of Lt Col Dr Yasmin Yusufzai, issuing the following key directions:

1. Cancellation of Deeds: The three fraudulent sale deeds dated July 9, 2020, and July 29, 2020, were declared illegal, null, and void. The Registrar was directed to endorse them as "cancelled."

2. Possession Restored: Defendants No. 3 and 4, who were in possession, were acknowledged as bona fide purchasers duped by the fraud. They were granted time until July 31, 2026, to vacate the property, subject to paying a monthly user charge of Rs. 50,000 to the plaintiff.

3. Stamp Duty Refund: The court permitted the final purchasers (Defendants No. 3 and 4) to seek a refund of the stamp duty paid on the cancelled deeds, ruling that the limitation period for their application would commence from the date of the judgment.

4. Legal Recourse: The plaintiff and the duped purchasers were granted liberty to pursue their respective legal remedies, including criminal proceedings, against the main perpetrator, Mr. Awes Rajput, and his accomplice who impersonated the plaintiff.

The judgment serves as a stark reminder of the dangers of property fraud and reinforces the legal principle that a title obtained through impersonation and forgery is fundamentally void and cannot be legitimised.