RANA PRATAP SINGH Vs. PATI TRIPATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a plaintiffs appeal against the judgment of reversal. He filed the suit claiming custody of sale deeds. According to him on 29. -6 -1974 the defendant executed three sale deeds for a total area of 1 bigha 1 katha 10 dhurs in his favours. While in two of them the consideration money was Rs. 3500 each, in the third sale deed it was Rs. 1,650. According to the plaintiff further, earlier on 13 -6 -72 the defendant had executed two mortgage deeds in his favour with respect to the same very land for a consideration of Rs. 3,500 At the time of purchase, that amount was adjusted towards part payment of the consideration money with respect to the first two sale deeds to the extent of half i. e. Rs. 1,750 each. Out of the balance amount of Rs. 5,150, Rs. 4950 was paid to the defendant at the time of execution leaving sum of Rs. 200 only payable. The suit was instituted as the defendant did not hand over the sale deeds not show readiness to accept the balance consideration money of Rs. 200 in spite of notice.

(2.) THE defendant admitted the execution of the sale deeds and part adjustment of the consideration money with respect to the two sale deeds. However, according to him, the plaintiff did not pay the balance consideration of Rs. 5,150 even after lapse of time and notice. As a matter of fact, in reply to the pleaders notice, the plaintiff took the stand that he had already paid Rs. 4950 and only sum of Rs. 200 was payable. In the circumstances the defendant cancelled the sale deeds to the knowledge of the plaintiff.

(3.) THE trial court held that the entire consideration money had been . paid by the plaintiff after adjustment of zerpeshagi except Rs. 200. It also held that irrespective of the non -payment of the whole consideration money, right, title and interest in the lands stood transferred from the very date of execution and registration of the sale deeds in terms of Sec. 54 of the Transfer of Property Act (in short, the Property Act). The first appellate court reversed both the findings holding that no consideration amount was paid to the defendant and that the title, which was to pass only after payment of the full consideration money in terms of the recitial of the deed did not pass to the plaintiff. The appellate court has based its findings on the recitals of the sale deeds disbelieving the oral evidence to the contrary led by the plaintiff.