NAND KISHORE Vs. MAHARANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The dispute in this second appeal relates to a plot of land which according to the plaintiff was purchased by him from Ram Tahal on the basis of sale-deed executed in his favour by Ram Tahal on 17-7-1967 which is a registered document. Defendant No. 3 on the other hand relies upon a sale deed dated 14-5- 1967 which is not a registered document. The consideration for the sale is Rs. 50/ -. The trial Court relying upon the sale deed dated 14-5-1967 dismissed the plaintiff's suit and held that the sale deed dated 14-5-1967 conferred title on defendant No. 3. Against the decree of the trial Court the plaintiff filed an appeal before the District Judge, Pratapgarh. The appellate Court by its judgment and decree dated 19-2-1977 allowed the appeal with the finding that the sale deed dated 14-5-1967 in favour of defendant No. 3 was not a registered document and was, therefore, in admissible. He also recorded a finding that there is good evidence on record to show that finding that there is good evidence on record to show that in all likelihood it was a sham transaction. After recording these findings the appellate Court decreed the plaintiff's suit. Against the appellate decree the defendant No. 3 Nand Kishore has come up in appeal before this Court. The judgment rendered by the lower appellate Court on the face of it is erroneous as the Court has not cared to look to the provision contained in Section 54 Of the Transfer of Property Act. Under Section 54 of the Act. In the case of immovable property, of value less than one hundred rupees, such transfer may be made either by a registered instru ment or by delivery of the property. Delivery of immovable property takes place when the seller places the buyer, or some person as he directs, in possession of the property. Section 54 of the Act is explicit that immovable property of the value less than hundred rupees can be sold either by a registered instrument or by delivery of the property. The lower appellate Court has committed an error of law in not applying its mind to Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act. This error has vitiated the decision, rendered by the lower appellate Court. There appears to be no evidence to show that the sale deed dated 14-5-1967 is a sham document. The judgment rendered by the lower appellate Court for the said reasons deserves be set aside. For the reasons stated above, the appeal is allowed. The decree passed by the lower appellate Court is set aside and the case is remanded to that Court with the direction to register the appeal to its original number and decide it in the light of the observations made in the iudgment. In the circumstances of the case there will be no order as to costs. .