Madras High Court
D.Suresh vs Devan on 4 November, 2022
Author: R. Hemalatha
Bench: R.Hemalatha
C.R.P.Nos.2331 & 2332 of 2020
and C.M.P.Nos.14656 & 14657 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.11.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA
C.R.P.Nos.2331 & 2332 of 2020
and
C.M.P.Nos.14656 & 14657 of 2020
D.Suresh ... Petitioner in both CRPs
Vs.
1.Devan
2.Maheswari
3.Jagan
4.Naveen ... Respondents in both CRPs
Common Prayer : Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India to set aside the fair and decreetal orders dated
25.02.2020 passed in I.A.Nos.695 & 696 of 2019 in O.S.No.203 of 2013
on the file of the learned District Munsif, Palacode.
In both CRPs :
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Selvakumar
Page 1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.Nos.2331 & 2332 of 2020
and C.M.P.Nos.14656 & 14657 of 2020
COMMON ORDER
The present Civil Revision Petitions are filed to set aside the fair and decreetal orders dated 25.02.2020 passed in I.A.Nos.695 & 696 of 2019 in O.S.No.203 of 2013 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Palacode.
2.The revision petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.203 of 2013 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Palacode. He filed the suit for declaration of his easementary right over the second item of the suit property and for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of suit items 3 & 4.
3.The defendants filed their written statement and both the parties went for trial after settlement of issues. The evidence on both sides were closed and the suit now stood posted for arguments. At this stage, Page 2 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.Nos.2331 & 2332 of 2020 and C.M.P.Nos.14656 & 14657 of 2020 the plaintiff filed two applications in I.A.Nos.695 & 696 of 2019 for reopening the evidence of the plaintiff and to recall him for the purpose of marking an unregistered agreement dated 18.09.2016 executed by him and the first defendant. Both the petitions were dismissed by the learned District Munsif, Palacode, vide his orders dated 25.02.2020, aggrieved over which the present Civil Revision Petitions are filed.
4.Heard Mr.R.Selvakumar, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner.
5. Though notice was served on the respondents and their names are printed in the cause list, there is no representation on behalf of the respondents, either in person or through a counsel.
6. Mr.R.Selvakumar, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner contended that subsequent to the filing of the suit, an agreement was entered into by the plaintiff and the first defendant, wherein it was agreed between the parties that the extent of land Page 3 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.Nos.2331 & 2332 of 2020 and C.M.P.Nos.14656 & 14657 of 2020 measuring to 0.25 cents in S.No.239/1 shall be put in possession of the first defendant and that 372 feet common passage can also be enjoyed by the plaintiff and in lieu of the same, the extent measuring 13 x 372 ft. common passage can be enjoyed by the plaintiff. It was further agreed that a sale deed should be executed within a period of three months from the date of the agreement. According to learned counsel for the revision petitioner, the said document can be treated only as an agreement and not as an instrument transferring the title in the property which requires registration under Section 17 of the Registration Act. In the document dated 18.09.2016 it is stated thus :
"18.09.2016k; Njjpapy; jUkGhp khtl;lk;, ghyf;NfhL tl;lk;, nfhuthz;lms;sp Cuhl;rp, rpf;fglhfhz;lms;sp fpuhkj;jpy; trpf;Fk; nja;tf P k;
Fkhud; RNu~; mth;fSf;F, jUkGhp khtl;lk,; ghyf;NfhL tl;lk;, nfhuthz;lms;sp Cuhl;rp, rpf;fglhfhz;lms;sp fpuhkj;jpy; trpf;Fk; uh[khzpf;f cilahh; Fkhud; Njtd; Mfpa ehd; vOjpf;nfhLj;j ghpth;j;jid gj;jpuk; vd;dntd;why; :
,g;gTk; vdf;F ghj;jpag;gl;L vd;dpl mDgt RthjPdj;jpypUe;J tUk; epyk; 239/1-y; 1.47 cs;sJ. me;j epyj;jpy; ehd; cdf;F 0.25 nrd;l; epyj;ij ehd;Page 4 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.Nos.2331 & 2332 of 2020 and C.M.P.Nos.14656 & 14657 of 2020 jUtjhf xg;gpf;nfhz;Ls;Nsd;. Vw;fdNt mNj rh;Nt vz;zpy; cdf;F 0.60 nrd;l; cs;sJ. ,e;j epyj;ij ePh; mDgtpj;J tu Ntz;baJ. ,e;j epyq;fSf;F 242/1A epyj;jpw;F 13 mb mfyk;, 372 mb epyj;jpy; nghJ tz;bghij tlf;fpypUe;J njw;fhf nry;Yk; ghij Vw;fdNt cs;sJ. jw;NghJ ,e;j nghJ tz;b ghij topahf rh;Nt vz;.239/1 epyj;jpw;F Nghf tu jw;NghJ 3 mb nghJtopia ehd; tpl;Ls;Nsd;. ,ij ePh; gad;gLj;jp tu Ntz;baJ. ,e;j topia ehd; ve;j tpjkhd tpy;yq;fNkh jfuhNwh nra;ahky; vd; KO kd rk;kjpapy; xg;gp vOjp nfhLj;j ghpth;jj ; id gj;jpuk;. ,jw;fhf ekf;Fs; Ngrp nfhz;lgb 0.10 nrz;by; tPLk; fhyp [hfhTk; ePh; vdf;F tpl;Ltpl Ntz;baJ vdTk; xg;gp nfhz;Nld;. ,e;j gj;jpuj;jpy; fz;Ls;s nrhj;ij %d;W khj jtizf;Fs; fpuak; gjpT nra;J nfhs;tJ vdTk; xg;gp vOjp nfhLj;j ghpth;jj ; id gj;jpuk;rhp. ,e;j gj;jpuj;jpy; fz;Ls;s nrhj;ij gw;wp tphpthd MNyhridnra;J, igry; nra;jij Vw;Wf;nfhz;L, fhty; epiyaj;jpy; nfhLj;Js;s Nf]; rk;ke;jg;gl;lij ehd; thg]; ngw;Wnfhs;fpNwd;. epyk; msT rh;Nt rpyT ehd; ghjp Vw;Wf;nfhs;fpNwd;.
A complete analysis of the said document clearly shows that there was a transfer of 25 cents of land in S.No.239/1 to the first defendant and the plaintiff was given a right in the common passage Page 5 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.Nos.2331 & 2332 of 2020 and C.M.P.Nos.14656 & 14657 of 2020 measuring 13 x 372 ft. Though towards the end it is stated that a sale deed has to be executed within three months from the date of the said document, the same has not been executed till date as admitted by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner.
7.Be that as it may, since there is a transfer of 25 cents of land in S.No.239/1 in favour of the plaintiff and in view of the same a right over common passage measuring 13 x 372 ft is given in favour of the defendant, the document requires to be registered under Section 17 of the Registration Act and therefore the same is not admissible. Moreover, the said document is also subsequent to the filing of the suit. In the circumstances, I do not find any infirmity in the orders passed by the trial Court.
8.Accordingly, these Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Civil Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
04.11.2022 Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking order mtl Page 6 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.Nos.2331 & 2332 of 2020 and C.M.P.Nos.14656 & 14657 of 2020 R. HEMALATHA, J.
mtl To
1.The District Munsif, Palacode.
2.The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Madras.
C.R.P.Nos.2331 & 2332 of 2020 and C.M.P.Nos.14656 & 14657 of 2020 04.11.2022 Page 7 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis