Advocate Sushila
SUPREME COURT HOLDS THAT SALE DEED EXECUTED WITHOUT PAYMENT OF CONSIDERATION HAS NO LEGAL EFFECT
Advocate Sushila Ram 28 Nov 2021

SUPREME COURT HOLDS THAT SALE DEED EXECUTED WITHOUT PAYMENT OF CONSIDERATION HAS NO LEGAL EFFECT

A Two Judge Bench of the Hon’ble #SupremeCourt of India comprising of Justices Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka passed a #Judgment dated 22-11-2021 in the case of Kewal Krishan v. Rajesh Kumar {Civil Appeal Nos. 6989-6992 Of 2021(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 2033-2036 of 2016)} and held that payment of #price is an essential part of a ##sale and that Sale Deed executed without payment of #consideration would not have any legal effect.


In the present case, one, Mr. Kewal Krishan (Appellant) and his elder brother, Mr. Sudarshan Kumar (one of the Respondents) had acquired Properties (Suit Properties) under the Sale Deeds dated 12-08-1976 and 19-10-1976. On 28-03-1980, the Appellant executed a Power of Attorney in favour of his elder brother, Mr. Sudarshan Kumar. Subsequently, on the basis of the said Power of Attorney, two Sale Deeds were executed by Mr. Sudarshan Kumar on 10-04-1981. The first Sale Deed was executed by him by which he purported to sell part of the Suit Properties to his minor sons and the sale consideration was shown as Rs.5,500/-.  The other Sale Deed was executed by Mr. Sudarshan Kumar in favour of his wife in respect of the remaining part of the Suit Properties and the sale consideration for the same was shown as Rs.6,875/-. In the instant case, Mr. Sudarshan Kumar, his Wife and his Sons were the Respondents.

On 10-05-1983, two separate Suits were instituted by the Appellant before the Trial Court, Punjab. One Suit was filed against Mr. Sudarshan Kumar and his two Sons and the other Suit was against Mr. Sudarshan Kumar and his Wife. Both the Suits were filed for seeking injunction and for restraining the Defendants from interfering with the possession of the Appellant and from alienating the share of the Appellant in the Suit Properties. Also, a prayer was made for passing a Decree for possession. On 23-11-1985, the Plaints in both the Suits were amended to incorporate the relief sought for declaration that the Power of Attorney and the Sale Deeds that were executed by Mr. Sudarshan Kumar on 10-04-1981 in favour his two Sons and Wife, were null and void.

It is the case of Mr. Sudarshan Kumar that while getting the Sale Deeds executed on 12-08-1976 and 19-10-1976, the Appellant got his name incorporated as a purchaser along with Mr. Sudarshan Kumar. According to the Respondent, the Appellant was a benamidar. The contention of the Respondent is that he was the sole owner of the Suit Properties and had paid the entire consideration for acquiring the Suit Properties under the Sale Deeds of 1976. Furthermore, the Appellant vide Letter dated 15-04-1980 had accepted the sole ownership of the Respondent and in pursuance of the said Letter, the Power of Attorney dated 23-03-1980 was executed by the Appellant. The same was duly registered under the Indian Registration Act, 1908 whereby, Mr. Sudarshan Kumar was appointed as the Appellant’s Attorney in respect of the Suit Properties. Therefore, Mr. Sudarshan Kumar contended that the Sale Deeds 10-04-1981 are legal and valid.


https://theindianlawyer.in/supreme-court-holds-that-sale-deed-executed-without-payment-of-consideration-has-no-legal-effect/


#supremecourt #saledeed #sale #consideration

Did you find this write up useful? YES 0 NO 0
Featured Members view all

New Members view all

×

C2RMTo Know More

Something Awesome Is In The Work

0

DAYS

0

HOURS

0

MINUTES

0

SECONDS

Sign-up and we will notify you of our launch.
We’ll also give some discount for your effort :)

* We won’t use your email for spam, just to notify you of our launch.