Civil Appeal No. 5800 of 2002. Case: Kaliaperumal Vs Rajagopal and Anr.. Supreme Court (India)
| Case Number | Civil Appeal No. 5800 of 2002 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: S. Nanda Kumar, Satish Kumar, G. Ananda Selvam, S. Babu and Rakesh K. Sharma, Advs. and For Respondents: V. Prahhakar, Ramjee Prasad, M.K.D. Namboodiri and Ashok K. Sadhu Khan, Advs. |
| Judges | R.V. Raveendran and J.M. Panchal, JJ. |
| Issue | Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Sections 54 and 55(4); Evidence Act - Section 92; Civil Procedure Code (CPC), 1908 - Section 100 |
| Citation | AIR 2009 SC 2122 , 2009 (3) AWC 2414 (SC) , JT 2009 (7) SC 124 , 2009 (4) MahLJ 706 (SC) , (2009) 6 MLJ 601 (SC) , RLW 2009 (3) SC 2468 , 2009 (4) SCALE 60 , (2009) 4 SCC 193 |
| Judgement Date | Friday February 20, 2009 |
| Court | Supreme Court (India) |
Judgment:
J.M. Panchal, J.
-
The instant appeal is directed against judgment dated November 27, 2001, rendered by the learned single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Second Appeal No. 1435 of 1990 by which the decree dated January 23, 1987, passed by the learned Subordinate Judge of Villupuram declaring the appellant to be owner of the disputed property and directing the respondents to hand over possession of the same to the appellant with mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 2000/- per month with proportionate costs, and affirmed (subject to the modification that appellant will be entitled to possession only on deposit of Rs. 40,000/-) by the learned District Judge, South Arcot District at Cuddalore vide judgment dated December 15, 1988, rendered in Appeal No. 55 of 1987, is set aside.
-
The facts emerging from the record of the case are as under: -
The suit properties originally belonged to the family of the respondents. First respondent (for himself and his minor sons) and the second respondent sold the properties to the appellant for a consideration of Rs. 43,000/- by a deed dated June 26, 1983. Out of the sale consideration of Rs. 43,000/- a sum of Rs. 3,000/- was to be appropriated towards the discharge of the mortgage executed by the respondents in favour of the appellant. The balance of Rs. 40,000/-was to be paid before the Sub-Registrar at the time of registration of the sale deed. It is the case of the appellant that before the document could be presented for registration, he paid to the respondents a sum of Rs. 25,000/- on 21.7.1983 as they required that amount for purchasing a lorry, therefore, at the time of registration of the sale deed he was required to pay only the balance of Rs. 15,000/- to the respondents. It is the case of the appellant that as the respondents had denied payment of Rs. 25,000/- to them, he was left with no other option but to present the document for registration before the Sub-Registrar on 21.10.1983. On presentation of the document for. registration, the Sub-Registrar issued summons to the respondents pursuant to which the first respondent appeared before him. The first respondent admitted execution of the deed but refused to put his thumb impression or to sign the endorsement to be made on the deed in token of admitting execution, on the ground that the respondents were not paid the remaining consideration of Rs. 40,000/- as stipulated in the deed. The Sub-Registrar registered the document on. October 26, 1983. According to the appellant, ever since the date of the execution of the sale deed and the date of its registration, he was ready to tender the balance of consideration of Rs. 15,000/- but the respondents were unreasonably refusing to receive the same and, therefore, he served a legal notice calling upon them to hand over possession of the properties sold and pay mesne...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Second Appeal No. 296 of 1991. Case: Md. Asim & Ors. Vs Sri Ram Khelawan Yadav & Ors.. High Court of Patna (India)
...Dulari Devi and another v. Kapildeo Rai and another, (2011) 6 SCC 555. The Hon'ble Supreme Court considering the earlier decision i.e. (2009) 4 SCC 193 (Kaliaperumal v. Rajagopal and another) held that "as per practice of ta khubzul badlain prevalent in Bihar (that is, title to the property......
-
RFA--184/2013. Case: AMARJEET KAUR Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. High Court of Delhi (India)
...was also placed on Iswar Das Vs. Muralidhar Rai AIR Orissa 170 and after close of hearing copy of judgment in Kaliaperumal Vs. Rajagopal (2009) 4 SCC 193 (paras No.16 and 18) was also handed The senior counsel for the appellant / plaintiff further contended that in entirety of the facts and......
-
RSA No.153 of 2010. Case: Dillip Kumar Sahoo Vs Smt. Malati Rout and Others. High Court of Orissa (India)
...reliance on the decisions in Janak Dulari Devi vrs.- Kapildeo Rai and Anr.: AIR 2011 SC 2521, Kaliaperumal vrs.-. Rajagopal and another: (2009) 4 SCC 193, Durgamani Behera & Ors. vrs.- Ghasiram Mohanta & Ors.: 1995 (I) CCC 368 (Orissa), Bhartu vrs.- Nawal @ Chhote (Dead) through LRs......
-
CS (OS) No. 918/2015. Case: KMJ Land Developers India Ltd. Vs Karan Realtech Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.. High Court of Delhi (India)
...price. In this regard, reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Kaliaperumal Vs. Rajagopal and Another (2009) 4 SCC 193 and two judgments of this Court in the cases of Shiv Kumar Sharma Vs. Madhu Aggarwal 2011 X AD (Delhi) 273 and RFA No. 865/2003 decided on ......
-
Second Appeal No. 296 of 1991. Case: Md. Asim & Ors. Vs Sri Ram Khelawan Yadav & Ors.. High Court of Patna (India)
...Dulari Devi and another v. Kapildeo Rai and another, (2011) 6 SCC 555. The Hon'ble Supreme Court considering the earlier decision i.e. (2009) 4 SCC 193 (Kaliaperumal v. Rajagopal and another) held that "as per practice of ta khubzul badlain prevalent in Bihar (that is, title to the property......
-
RFA--184/2013. Case: AMARJEET KAUR Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. High Court of Delhi (India)
...was also placed on Iswar Das Vs. Muralidhar Rai AIR Orissa 170 and after close of hearing copy of judgment in Kaliaperumal Vs. Rajagopal (2009) 4 SCC 193 (paras No.16 and 18) was also handed The senior counsel for the appellant / plaintiff further contended that in entirety of the facts and......
-
RSA No.153 of 2010. Case: Dillip Kumar Sahoo Vs Smt. Malati Rout and Others. High Court of Orissa (India)
...reliance on the decisions in Janak Dulari Devi vrs.- Kapildeo Rai and Anr.: AIR 2011 SC 2521, Kaliaperumal vrs.-. Rajagopal and another: (2009) 4 SCC 193, Durgamani Behera & Ors. vrs.- Ghasiram Mohanta & Ors.: 1995 (I) CCC 368 (Orissa), Bhartu vrs.- Nawal @ Chhote (Dead) through LRs......
-
CS (OS) No. 918/2015. Case: KMJ Land Developers India Ltd. Vs Karan Realtech Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.. High Court of Delhi (India)
...price. In this regard, reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Kaliaperumal Vs. Rajagopal and Another (2009) 4 SCC 193 and two judgments of this Court in the cases of Shiv Kumar Sharma Vs. Madhu Aggarwal 2011 X AD (Delhi) 273 and RFA No. 865/2003 decided on ......
