MAKHAN CHANDRA HAZRA Vs. NETAI CHAND HAZRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the Courts below have decreed the suit in part and the concurrent findings are sought to be assailed in the instant appeal raising an issue that those are perverse and mutually destructive. A suit for declaration of right, title and interest in respect of the suit property consisting of 2.92 decimal of land on the basis of a deed of sale being No. 3485/1957 dtd. 28/4/1957 was filed by the plaintiffs/respondents. Admittedly the entire suit property belong to Bholanath Hazra, the predecessor of both the parties. It is a categorical stand of the plaintiffs/respondents that the said original owner during his lifetime executed and registered a deed of sale in favour of one of his son, namely Haripada Hazra, being the predecessor of the plaintiffs/respondents and, therefore, excluded the other heirs to inherit the said property. Since the defendants/appellants were creating a cloud on the title acquired by the plaintiffs/respondents by way of inheritance from his father, namely Haripada Hazra, the suit came to be filed for declaration of title in respect thereof. Basically it is a suit based upon the said sale deed dtd. 28/4/1957, which according to the defendants/appellants is sham transaction. According to the defendants/appellants the sale deed lacks consideration, which is one of the integral part of transfer of immovable property and, therefore, cannot be regarded as valid in the eye of law. It is further contended that it is inconceivable that a father during his lifetime would execute a purported sale deed in favour of one of his son depriving the other heirs and, therefore, such transaction is not real. A further stand is taken that the said Haripada Hazra during his lifetime never asserted the right, title and interest in respect of the suit property even after the entry made in the Record of Rights in favour of all the heirs of the said Bholanath Hazra, which conclusively proves that the property was never intended to be sold by the said original owner. Lastly, it is contended that a story of execution of deed of relinquishment is made out in the plaint which implies that the purported sale deed was never acted upon and, therefore, no right, title and interest would pass upon the plaintiffs/respondents on the basis thereof.

(2.) Both the Courts disbelieved the story set up by the defendants/appellants. The transaction of immovable property fetching more than a value of Rs.100.00 is required to be executed by a written document and is compulsorily registrable under Sec. 17 of the Registration Act. The moment the document is executed by the original owner having right, title and interest in respect of the immovable property and the said document is duly registered with the Registering Authority, it passes the title immediately upon execution and registration thereof. A plea is sought to be taken that the sale deed without any consideration is ineffective, bad and illegal in the eye of law. There is no quarrel to the proposition that in order to pass on the title or in other words transfer the title in respect of the immovable property, the consideration is an integral part thereof. We had an occasion to peruse the certified copy of the sale deed relied upon by the defendants/appellants, wherefrom it appears that the price of the property was shown at Rs.300.00. The recital in the deed would further evince that the aforesaid price has been paid to the original vendor by the said Haripada Hazra and, therefore, it cannot be said that there is no consideration shown in the deed.

(3.) We cannot overlook the fact that there are various modes of writing the sale deeds effecting the transfer of immovable property. Sometimes the deeds are executed in English language and the format, which is being used in respect thereof, shows something differently than the sale deed executed in vernacular language. What is important in the aforesaid matter that the executant is transferring his right, title and interest in respect of the immovable property to the other on a consideration shown therein. It is not necessary that a memo of consideration is to be appended in the sale deed executed in vernacular language, if the recitals or contents thereof clearly indicates the payment of such consideration money by the purchaser to the seller.