KANRAJ C SHAH Vs. R THANGARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF in O.S. 651 of 1993 on the fde of II Additional District Munsif Court, Dindugul is the Revision Petitioner herein.

(2.) THE suit was filed for declaration of title. Plaintiff is the owner of "A" Schedule properties. Plaintiff also sought for consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining defendants, their men and servants from in any way interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of plaintiff over the suit property and for mandatory injunction directing first defendant to remove the superstructures over the suit "B" Schedule property and for other reliefs.

(3.) A Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent wherein it is said that he has taken two sale deeds from the power agent of the Plaintiff on 30.1.1981 for Rs. 45.000/- and Rs. 40,000/- and as per the recitals in the documents possession was also handed over to him. It is also stated that he had built a house spending more than a lakh of rupees and sale deed was also duly executed after receiving power of attorney. The document is also attested by the Sub-Registrar. The document was returned solely due to the fact that the provisions of Section 230A of the Income-Tax Act regarding Income Tax clearance was not obtained by the Vendor's power agent who promised to produce the same but not produced it. Only because of the fraud committed by the Plaintiffs agent the document could not be registered. When plaintiffs agent has received the consideration and also handed over possession he cannot repudiate the transaction and to prove the factum of possession document can be marked. That is only for collateral purposes and not to prove the sale itself. It is said that in the impugned order all these aspects were considered and there is no ground for interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.