A.P.D.D.Coop F Ltd Hyd vs T.Chandrasekar Reddy And 6 Ors on 27 June, 2023
In Gangadhar Vithal Kale Vasarni v. Shyamlal Bhikchand
Rathod9 case, the deceased plaintiff/respondent filed suit for recovery of
possession of the suit land on basis of title, which he derived from
deceased Maneji @ Manika s/o Dattaram, who was admittedly original
owner on basis of a registered sale deed dated 5-11-1971, executed in his
favour. He asserted that the defendant/appellant had no right or interest
in the suit land. However, the appellant unlawfully dispossessed him in or
about 1975 and claimed certain rights on basis of an agreement of sale,
which was allegedly executed by original owner Maneji @ Manika
9
(2009) 2 Bom CR 829
PNR,J & NBK,J
CCCA No.216 of 2000
38
s/o.Dattaram in his favour. He further asserted that said Maneji @ Manika
never executed any agreement of sale in favour of the defendant/appellant
and yet, illegally, the possession of the suit land was being enjoyed by the
latter. Consequently, he sought recovery of possession along with
compensation on account of unlawful enjoyment of the suit land by the
defendant/appellant. The learned Civil Judge came to conclusion that the
deceased plaintiff was never put in possession of the suit land on basis of
sale deed dated 5.11.1971. It was further held that the appellant was in
possession of the suit land on basis of the agreement executed by Maneji @
Manika s/o Dattaram Kale in his favour. The learned Civil Judge,
therefore, dismissed the suit. The first Appellate Court, however, held that
the appellant could not plead and prove his readiness and willingness to
perform his part of agreement to sell and as such protection under section
53-A of the Transfer of Property Act was not available to him. The first
Appellate Court held that the deceased plaintiff-Shyamlal became owner of
the suit land on basis of the sale deed and was, therefore, entitled to
possession thereof. Aggrieved thereby second appeal was filed before the
High Court of Bombay.