BALRAM SINGH versus KELO DEVI

BALRAM SINGH versus KELO DEVI

An unregistered agreement to sell is inadmissible in evidence and a plaintiff cannot obtain the substantive relief of specific performance, nor obtain an equivalent substantive benefit (such as permanent injunction protecting possession) by clever drafting based solely on such an unregistered document; accordingly the decree based on that document was set aside and the trial court judgment allowing the defendant's counter-claim was restored.

Parties
Appellant (original Defendant): BALRAM SINGH; Respondent (original Plaintiff): KELO DEVI
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
23 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Judgment (second Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned High Court and first appellate court judgments set aside; trial court judgment restored.
Legal Topics
Unregistered Agreement to Sell, Admissibility in Evidence, Specific Performance, Permanent Injunction, Counter Claim, Clever Drafting
Deeds and Documents Practice and Procedure Civil Procedure Evidence Unregistered Agreement to Sell Admissibility in Evidence Specific Performance Permanent Injunction +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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BALRAM SINGH

Appellant (original Defendant)

KELO DEVI

Respondent (original Plaintiff)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Judgment (second Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an unregistered agreement to sell is admissible in evidence for obtaining permanent injunction
  2. 2 Whether a plaintiff can obtain relief of permanent injunction by clever drafting to avoid seeking specific performance based on an unregistered agreement to sell
  3. 3 Whether an unregistered document may be used for collateral purposes to grant substantive relief

Ratio Decidendi

An unregistered agreement to sell is inadmissible in evidence and a plaintiff cannot obtain the substantive relief of specific performance, nor obtain an equivalent substantive benefit (such as permanent injunction protecting possession) by clever drafting based solely on such an unregistered document; accordingly the decree based on that document was set aside and the trial court judgment allowing the defendant's counter-claim was restored.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned High Court and first appellate court judgments set aside; trial court judgment restored.

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order dated 10.12.2019 of the High Court quashed and set aside.
  • Judgment and decree dated 29.01.2001 passed by the first appellate Court decreeing the suit for permanent injunction and dismissing the counter-claim is quashed and set aside.