Mere Suit Seeking Recovery Of Possession Not Sufficient When Plaintiff's Title Is Disputed : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that a suit simpliciter for recovery of possession without seeking a cancellation of a sale deed would not be maintainable when the plaintiff's title is disputed. According to the Court, when the plaintiff's title was disputed by the defendant by cogent evidence, then the proper remedy for the plaintiff would be to file a suit for cancellation of the sale deed executed in the defendant's favour along with the suit for recovery of possession, and not just a suit simpliciter seeking recovery of possession.

A bench of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi heard the case, where the Appellants, being the legal representatives of the plaintiffs, filed a suit simpliciter seeking recovery of possession of the suit property on the strength of an agreement to sell entered into between the plaintiff and the vendor, but failed to seek the relief of either specific performance of the agreement to sell or cancellation of the sale deed executed in favour of defendant No. 1.

Briefly put, in 1952, plaintiff was allotted a plot by a housing society under an Agreement to Sell, with a condition to construct a house within three years. Unable to build, plaintiff wrote a letter on October 4, 1954, requesting the society to transfer the plot to his "nephew," i.e., Defendant no.1. The society accepted, and defendant no.1 took possession, paid all dues, and constructed a house by 1959.

In 1960, the society executed a registered Sale Deed in favour of Defendant No. 1. No sale deed was ever executed in favour of the plaintiff.

In 1975, plaintiff's legal heirs-Appellants filed a suit for possession, alleging fraudulent transfer, but without seeking cancellation of the 1960 sale deed or specific performance of the 1952 agreement.

The Trial Court and the Delhi High Court dismissed the suit, following which an appeal was filed by the plaintiff's LRs before the Supreme Court.

Affirming the dismissal of the suit, the judgment authored by Justice Aravind Kumar observed that the simplicitor suit for possession was rightly held to be non-maintainable given the fact that the title of the Appellants was severely disputed, as no sale deed was ever executed in favour of the plaintiff.

The Court said that “if the title of the Plaintiff is not under risk, a prayer for possession is sufficient. But if the title of the Plaintiff is rebutted by the Defendant by cogent evidence, a mere prayer seeking possession of the property would not suffice. This is for the simple reason that a person, whose title is disputed, cannot lay a challenge to the true owners' right title and ownership as the same becomes a disputed question of fact for the Court to adjudicate upon.”

Moreover, the Court said that an Agreement to Sell does not confer title without a registered Sale Deed, that the plaintiff had abandoned his rights by his 1954 letter, and that a suit for possession simpliciter is not maintainable when the plaintiff's title is seriously disputed by a registered sale deed in the defendant's favour.

“After Defendant No. 1 asserted his title on the strength of a registered Sale Deed, it was incumbent on the Plaintiffs to institute a suit for declaration for cancellation of the Sale Deed or in the alternative, the plaintiffs ought to have filed a suit for specific performance of the Agreement to Sell which stood in their favour...A basic prayer for possession cannot survive when the Defendant No.1 has a registered Sale Deed in his name nullifying the title of the Plaintiffs.”, the Court held.

As a result, the appeal was dismissed.

Appearance:

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Kailash Vasdev, Sr. Adv. Mr. C. Aryama Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. Akhil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vineet Jhanji, Adv. Ms. Jyoti Mendiratta, AOR Mr. Imran Moulaey, Adv. Mr. Krishnesa, Adv. Ms. Ananya Basudha, Adv. Mr. Ravinder Pal Singh, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Raghavachari Acharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Chinmoy Pardip Sharma, Sr. Adv. Mr. Kailash Vasdev, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sumeet Lall, AOR Mr. Kunal Sinha, Adv. Mr. Prasouk Jain, Adv. Mr. Nicholas Choudhury, Adv. Mr. Sidhant Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Palak Rawat, Adv. Ms. Vanshika Ashu, Adv. Mr. Vivek Jain, Adv. Mr. Avinash Wadhwani, Adv. Ms. Rabiya Singh Thakur, Adv. Ms. Shalini Nair, Adv. Mr. Samarth Goyal, Adv. Mr. Vijay Deora, Adv. Mr. Irfan Hasieb, Adv.  Ms. Aashna Gill, AOR Mr. Kuldeep Singh Kuchaliya, Adv. Ms. Gagandeep, Adv.