Witness Does Not Agree To Terms & Conditions Of A Document, Person Executing It Does: Allahabad High Court

While drawing a distinction between a witness to a document and a person who executes such document, the Allahabad High Court held that a witness does not agree to the terms and conditions of the document, whereas a person executing the same does.

Respondent no.3 was allotted the property in question in an auction for retail outlet dealership. Petitioner filed a complaint against the said respondent alleging that he had violated the mandatory provision laid down under Clause 4 (vi) (a) of the Brochure June, 2023 while leasing the property.

The condition read as:

“The other conditions with respect to offering of land are as under:-

1. The land should be available with the applicant as on the date of application and should have minimum lease of 19 years and 11 months (as advertised by respective oil company) from the date or after the date of advertisement but not later than the date of application. If the offered land is on Long-term lease and there are multiple owners, then lease deed should be executed by all co-owners of the offered plot. Incase lease deed is not executed by all co-owners' such lease deed shall be treated as invalid.”

The complaint filed by the petitioner was rejected. Challenging the rejection order, counsel for petitioner argued that only one of the co-owners had singed the lease deed whereas the rest had witnessed it, which was a violation of the aforesaid condition. It was further argued that the subsequent deed submitted by the respondent was treated as the final deed even though there were no changes from the first one.

Per contra, counsel for respondents argued that the aforesaid clause was only to prevent future litigation and once the co-owners had witnessed the lease deed, in effect they had accepted the lease deed.

The Court observed that no reasons were assigned by the respondent authority for accepting the subsequent lease deed. It held that without cancelling the first lease deed, the second deed could not have been executed.

Holding, that the aforesaid clause in a mandatory provision, the bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Vipin Chandra Dixit held

“There is a huge difference between executing a particular document and being a witness to the same document. The witness does not in any manner agree to the terms and conditions in the said lease deed while a person who executes the document agrees to the terms and conditions. In light of the same, co-owners witnessing a particular document would not amount to compliance of Clause 4 (vi) (a) of the Brochure that categorically requires execution by all the co-owners.”

Accordingly, the Court directed that the allotment to respondent no. 3 be cancelled, and fresh draw of lots be conducted for the property in question.

Case Title: Veer Bahadur Singh v. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited And 2 Others [WRIT - C No. - 169 of 2025]

Click Here To Read/Download Order