MANIK MAJUMDER AND OTHERS versus DIPAK KUMAR SAHA (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & OTHERS

MANIK MAJUMDER AND OTHERS versus DIPAK KUMAR SAHA (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & OTHERS

The majority held that where the plaintiff claims title based on registered sale deeds executed by a person claiming under a PoA allegedly executed outside India, the plaintiffs must prove compliance with Section 33(1)(c) for the PoA; because the original PoA was not produced, the executant was not examined, and concurrent findings below recorded non-compliance with Section 33(1)(c), the High Court erred in drawing a statutory presumption under Section 60 in favour of the plaintiffs; consequently the trial court judgment dismissing the suit (confirmed by first appellate court) was restored and the High Court decree was quashed.

Parties
Appellants: Manik Majumder and others; Respondents: Dipak Kumar Saha (dead) through LRs. & others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
13 January 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Decision to the Supreme Court (civil Appeal No. 2965 of 2022)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part for appellants; impugned High Court judgment and order decreeing the suit quashed and set aside; judgment and decree of trial court, confirmed by first appellate court, restored
Legal Topics
Power of Attorney, Section 33(1)(c) Registration Act, Section 60 Registration Act (statutory Presumption), Proof of Registered Documents, Endorsement by Sub Registrar, Non Production of Primary Document
Registration Act, 1908 Evidence Act, 1872 Civil Procedure Code Property Law Power of Attorney Section 33(1)(c) Registration Act Section 60 Registration Act (statutory Presumption) Proof of Registered Documents +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Manik Majumder and others

Appellants

Dipak Kumar Saha (dead) through LRs. & others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Decision to the Supreme Court (civil Appeal No. 2965 of 2022)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a statutory presumption under Section 60 of the Registration Act can be drawn in favour of a registered sale deed when the underlying power of attorney allegedly executed outside India is not produced and Section 33(1)(c) requirements are not shown to be complied with
  2. 2 Whether non-production of the power of attorney is fatal to proof of title when sale deeds are registered and proved under Section 67 of the Evidence Act
  3. 3 Whether the endorsement by the Sub-Registrar is substantive evidence of authority to execute the sale deed

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that where the plaintiff claims title based on registered sale deeds executed by a person claiming under a PoA allegedly executed outside India, the plaintiffs must prove compliance with Section 33(1)(c) for the PoA; because the original PoA was not produced, the executant was not examined, and concurrent findings below recorded non-compliance with Section 33(1)(c), the High Court erred in drawing a statutory presumption under Section 60 in favour of the plaintiffs; consequently the trial court judgment dismissing the suit (confirmed by first appellate court) was restored and the High Court decree was quashed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part for appellants; impugned High Court judgment and order decreeing the suit quashed and set aside; judgment and decree of trial court, confirmed by first appellate court, restored

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order dated 05.04.2018 of the High Court of Tripura quashed and set aside
  • Judgment and decree passed by the trial court dated 11.09.1995, confirmed by first appellate court, restored