S.54 TPA | Unregistered Sale Deed Cannot Defy Title By Delivery Of Possession Of Immovable Property Valued Below ₹100: Karnataka High Court

A single judge bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum sitting at Kalaburagi held the same while dismissing an appeal filed by one Gangappa, questioning the concurrent findings of the Courts below, wherein the suit filed by him seeking relief of declaration and permanent injunction was dismissed.

The appellant claimed that the suit schedule property was owned by his maternal grandfather who had only one daughter, who is the mother of the appellant herein. It was alleged that the defendant has concocted a fictitious document and is trying to interfere in the suit schedule property.

Defendant opposed the plea saying that his father purchased the property from plaintiff's maternal grandfather under sale deed dated 14.11.1963 and thus acquired absolute right and title pursuant which was bequeathed to him by way of will dated 11.06.1973. Since the market value of the suit property was less than Rs.100, the sale deed did not warrant any registration and therefore, his father purchased the suit schedule property under unregistered sale deed and therefore, sought for dismissal of the suit.

Findings:

The bench noted that to substantiate his claim in regard to possession over the suit schedule property, there is absolutely no iota of evidence led by the plaintiff. On the contrary, the defendant, by way of rebuttal evidence, produced a copy of patta book and land revenue paid receipts. Coupled with these documents, the defendant succeeded in eliciting from cross-examination that the defendant's father was in fact cultivating the land in question.

Noting that the defendant's father is found to be in physical possession of land the bench said, "It is a trite law that sale of an immovable property of value of less than Rs.100/- can be made either by registered document or by delivery of possession. In such cases, vendee acquires complete title by mere delivery of possession of the property. Fact that there is in addition an unregistered sale deed cannot affect the good title acquired by him. Therefore, if there is a physical delivery of possession, an unregistered deed would not be rendered nugatory, only on account of existence of an unregistered sale deed."

It added, "If in pursuance of an unregistered sale deed, possession has been delivered, the buyer can fall back upon the title by delivery of possession although the unregistered sale deed by itself does not convey title."

The bench then clarified that, "Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act clearly reveals that there are only two modes of transfer by sale and these are (i) registered instrument; and (ii) delivery of possession. The first overlaps the second, for a transfer may in all cases be made by a registered instrument. It is only in the case of tangible immovable property of value less than Rs.100/-, that the Section 54 of the T.P. Act allows the simpler alternative of delivery of possession."

Then it held, "The transaction is of the year 1963. Therefore, it has to be presumed that the vendor has transferred title and the same is authenticated by delivery of possession. There is evidence dehors the unregistered sale deed which is amply sufficient in my opinion to support the conclusion."

Finally it said, "Appeal is liable to be dismissed on the ground that both the Courts below have found as a matter of fact that there was a sale accompanied by delivery of possession and that is a finding of fact which cannot be disputed. Therefore, no substantial question of law arises for consideration."

Case Title: Gangappa v. Lingareddy

Case No: RSA NO.200352/2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 413

Date of Order: 10^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022

Appearance: Advocate Harshavardhan R. Malipatil for appellant; Advocate Sachin M. Mahajan for respondent