TMI Blog1964 (1) TMI 65X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecree against Narahari. Defendant No. 1 put the suit land in court sale in execution of the said decree and purchased the same. On January 18, 1956 by a registered sale deed Ext. a/1 defendant No. 1 sold the suit land 12.88 acres in area for consideration of ₹ 600/-. It was agreed that ₹ 300/- would be paid immediately and possession would be delivered; that the balance of ₹ 300/- would be paid one year after; then the sale deed itself would be delivered after such payment of the entire consideration money. In pursuance of the said agreement ₹ 300/- was immediately paid and possession was delivered. The balance of ₹ 300/- was not paid. On April 5, 1956 defendant No. 1 sold the suit land to defendants 2 and 3 un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld be paid within three days but no part of the consideration was in fact paid. Possession of the suit land was not delivered to the plaintiff. Therefore there was no question of damages to the suit land as alleged. The sale deed Ext. A/I was in the custody of the vendor defendant No. 1. It was still found that in view of the terms of the sale deed title passed to the plaintiff irrespective of non-payment of consideration. Accordingly the suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiff and his title was declared but no damages were granted. The second appeal was filed by defendant No. 1 against the decision of the courts below whereby the plaintiff's title was declared. The plaintiff filed a cross appeal against the decision of the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resent prevalent price of ₹ 600/- and having received the consideration in cash make the vendee the owner in possession of the vended property from this date and stipulate that the vendee himself and his sons, grand-sons and future generations shall possess the said property and enjoy all rights thereto, pay rents in the Zamindar's sherista, obtain rent receipts in your own name and having mutated your own name in the settlement records transfer if necessary and for which neither we nor our successors shall lay any claim. If we lay any claim it shall be rejected. The question is: Under which category this clause falls? Is it an independent clause or a dependent clause or an involved clause? This is a question of construction o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any part of the consideration to the vendor, non-delivery of possession of the suit land to the purchaser and the custody of the sale deed itself left with the vendor defendant No. 1 are telling circumstances to show that it was not the intention of the parties that title would pass irrespective of non-payment of consideration. On this point several decisions were cited on both sides all of which were decided on the construction of the terms of the impugned document in each case. It is unnecessary to deal with them. There , is no dispute about the tests to be applied in such cases. In my opinion, the courts below were not correct in their construction of the impugned sale deed. Apparently they did not keep in view the tests in the light ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
