NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY,

BHOPAL

PROPERTY LAW-I

CASE ANALYSIS:
VIDYA LAL AND ANOTHER V. KULBHUSAN KUMAR
AND OTHERS1
SIXTH TRIMESTER
SUBMITTED BY: SUBMITTED T0:
ASHUTOSH PRASAD DR. SANJAY KUMAR YADAV

SECTION A
2018 BALLB 64

1 CSA No. 31/2013, IA No. 32/2013, 01/2018, CMP No.1987/2009 (1/2019

1
 Acknowledgment

I take this opportunity to express my profound gratitude and deep regards to Dr. Sanjay Kumar
Yadav my guide for her exemplary guidance, monitoring and constant encouragement
throughout the course of this thesis. The blessing, help and guidance given by her from time to
time shall carry me a long way in the journey of life on which I am about to embark. I would
further like to thank her for giving me this opportunity to do this project by instilling his faith
in me.

Further I would like to extend my gratitude towards National Law Institute University which
as an institution gave me the platform to carry out my research on such an important topic of
Political Science.

I am also grateful to my parents for their constant guidance and support throughout the project.
It would have been impossible for me to complete this project without their love and affection.

Last but not the least; I would like to thank God for being with me throughout the course of the
project and keeping everything in its place.

2
 Table of Contents

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................. 4

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM ................................................................................................. 4

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY ............................................................................................. 4

LIST OF STATUES .................................................................................................................. 5

LIST OF CASES ....................................................................................................................... 5

ARGUMENTS FROM THE APPELLANT........................................................................... 11

ARGUMENTS OF THE RESPONDENTS ........................................................................... 12

INTERPRETATION OF LAW .............................................................................................. 13

CONCRETE JUDGEMENT………………………………………………………………..16
CASE ANALYSIS…………………………………………………………………………...17
CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………………..21
BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………………………...22

3
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This project is largely based on the doctrinal method of data collection

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

In this project an analysis of the case VIDYA LAL AND ANOTHER V. KULBHUSAN KUMAR
AND OTHERS is to be done where in a immovable property is given on lease of which actual
amount of the property is not paid only a small portion of the amount is paid to the party.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1. To analyse the case VIDYA LAL AND ANOTHER V. KULBHUSAN KUMAR AND
OTHERS.
2. To give opinion on courts judgement of the above case.
3. To analyse the statues being discussed in the case.

HYPOTHESIS
The Registration Act, 1908 is a Consolidating Act and not an Amending Act. It extends
to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir . The Preamble of the Act
states "An Act to consolidate that enactments relating to the Registration of Documents".
The object of such consolidation is the reduction in to a systematic form of the whole
provisions contained in number of statues relating to the Registration of documents.
Registration system was almost unknown to the Indian people due to the lofty ethics. But
time gradually began to change and the need for compulsory registration was felt,
especially in the declining Moghul period of the 18th Century so that no one could claim
any interest on any forged document or Sanad during or on the eve of the British Rule.
Provincial laws were passed from time to time for the establishment of offices of
registration.
By Act VIII of 1871, the office of the Registrar General was abolished under the altered
designation of "Inspector General of Registration" as an office of record and registry and
the limitation of the duties to Inspection and General Superintendence.

4
 After several amendments, the present Registration Act (XVI of 1908) came into force on
1 st January 1908 . The provisions relating to the registration of documents were scattered
about in seven enactments and the object of passing of this Act was to collect these
provisions and incorporate them in one Act. Even after that it has gone through several
amendments and the Registration Act,1908 was adapted with some changes finally.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Whether the document, which is styled as Patta nama, can be looked into for determining the
factum of possession, even if the same is not registered under Section 17 of the Registration
Act, 1977?

LIST OF STATUES

1. SECTION 100 OF C.P.C – SECOND APPEAL.

2. SECTION 17 OF REGISTRATION ACT 1908.
3. SECTION 49 OF REGISTRATION ACT, 1908.

LIST OF CASES

1. K.B. SAHA AND SONS PVT. LTD. M/S DEVELOPMENT LTD.

2. GURDEEP KOUR AND OTHERS V. KAKI AND OTHERS.
3. NARAYANANN RAJENDRAN AND ANOTHER VS. LEKSHMY SAROJINI
AND OTHERS.
4. THIAAGARAJAN AND OTHERS V. SRI VENUGOPALA SWAMY B.KOIL
AND OTHERS.
5. RAGHUNATH AND ORS. v. KEDAR NATH
6. S. KALADEVI v. V.R. SOMASUNDARAM AND ORS.
7. NAND SINGH v. SEVA SINGH
8. BUTTERWORTHS, NEW DELHI, NARSI v. PURSHOTTAM
9. K.B SAHA AND SONS Pvt. Ltd. v. DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANT Ltd
10. AVINASH KUMAR CHAUHAN v. VIJAY KRISHNA MISHRA

5
11. BHASKAR RAO v. T GABRIEL AND ORS.
12. BHUKAN MIAN v. RADHIKA.
13. G. BALAKISHTIAH VS. B. RANGA REDDY.
14. HEMANTA KUMARI DEBI V. MIDNAPUR ZAMINDARI CO.
15. SHIBANI BASU V. SANDIP RAY.
16. RAMLAXMI VS. BANK OF BARODA.
17. RATAN LAL AND ORS. V. HARISANKAR AND ORS.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

• MULLA, The Transfer of Property act :

Mulla's The Transfer of Property Act is a section-wise commentary on the
Transfer of Property Act, 1882. It retains its original style and authenticity
while making revisions in the substantive content and also additions and
deletions wherever required. It contains appendices that include select
allied Acts such as The Hindu Disposition of Property Act, 1916, The
Government Grants Act, 1895, Dispositions of Property (Bombay)
Validation Act, 1947. This edition incorporates a glossary of non-English
terms (with case law references). The table of cases also carries case
citations for the convenience of the reader.

The book is a must have for Practicing Civil Lawyers, Judges , Law firms
especially those dealing with Property law or Real Estate matters, Legal
Advisors, Standing Counsel for Banks, Legal Departments of Companies,
Company Secretaries, Real Estate Developers or Builders, Libraries of
Law Colleges and Research Institutions, Libraries of all Courts, Libraries
of Legislative Bodies at all levels, Judicial Academies - At State and
Central Level, Law students.

• The Transfer of property Act by Dr. AVATAR SINGH :

Textbook on The Transfer of Property Act, is the most lucid and analytical
study of various sections of the Transfer of Property Act, 1881. The book
is a section-wise commentary explaining the concepts in detail with the

6
 help of illustrations and judicial precedents. The text in the chapters is
divided into headings and sub-headings which make it easy for readers to
understand and remember. At the end of these chapters, the book has
provided short notes, often asked questions as also some practical
problems along with their Solutions, with an object to render an exhaustive
coverage of the subject at hand. In this fifth edition, the case-law has been
updated incorporating all important judgments rendered by the Courts in
India since the publication of the last edition.

This book is an essential reference for law students pursuing law course at
different law schools, universities and institutes, enabling them to
understand and gather analytical skills pertaining to the subject of
"Transfer of Property"

• The Transfer of property Act by S.N. SHUKLA :

The 28th Edition of Dr. S.N. Shukla's "Transfer of Property Act" is being
presented before the readers. It is a great pleasure in revising the authentic
work of a great author. The brevity, clarity and lucid exposition of the
principles of transfer of property in this book had appealed to me even
during my student life. I consider myself fortunate enough to be associated
with a reputed work from the respected author.
I have not disturbed the originality of the book and to make the book more
useful 1 have revised the book in the light of the latest judicial
pronouncements of the Supreme Court and High Courts and legislative
amendments. An attempt has been made to further polish the felicity of
expression, due care has been taken to preserve those qualities of the book
which are responsible for its greater popularity among the Law Students,
Students of Competitive & Judicial Exams., Bar & Bench, Law Teachers
etc.
The book has really been written in simple and understandable language.
Care has been taken that the bulk of the book may not increase
unreasonably. Imperfections, if any, are begged to be excused and
communicated so as to be corrected in subsequent editions.
1 pay my gratitude to Mr. Aman Narula, the partner of Allahabad Law

7
 Agency for showing a confidence in me and taking a lot of interest in
publishing the present edition and giving it an excellent shape.

• The Transfer of property Act by Dr. R.K. SINHA :

The Number of judicial rulings delivered during the year 2017 has been
much greater than rulings delivered in any earlier years. The reason could
be the property has become a highly valuable factor in the life of the
people. One of the important indication of this happening is that cases on
family settlement about property matters have caused many problems in
family affairs. Thus, the value of property has started disturbing family
peace also. Transfer of property cases by educational institution also
shows that increasing value of property has influenced the management of
educational institutions also. Sale of secured assets by banking institutions
through the medium of the Debt Recovery Tribunal has remained
problematic. Sale of Property under registered deed has to be protected.
Sale cannot impose restrictions upon buyers freedom to enjoy the benefit
of property purchased by him. A good number of cases have appeared
under Section 52 on transfer during lis pendense which means that the
number of complicated transactions in sale of property has increased. Such
complicated transaction have also appeared in large numbers under the
doctrine of part performance enshrined in Section 53-A. An unregistered
sale deed has no value as a transaction.

8
 MATERIAL FACTS

1. The Respondent filed a civil suit for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the
appellant from interfering in the suit land.

2. Respondents claimed to be in possession of suit land by the virtue of the document Patta
nama moida istamarari (Agreement of lease ) executed in favour of the respondents.

3. The appellant contested that Patta Nama was executed fraudently by the respondent.

4. Trial court and First appellate court dismissed the appeal in favour of the respondents.

5. Appellant filed civil second appeal in the appellate court in J&K.

9
 ISSUES CONTESTED

1. Whether the judgment suffers from any perversity?

2. Whether the document, which is styled as Patta nama, can be looked into for determining
the factum of possession, even if the same is not registered under Section 17 of the Registration
Act, 1977?

10
 ARGUMENTS FROM THE APPELLANT

1. Appellant argued that judgement and the decree of the first appellate court can’t sustain
as both the courts have failed to take note that the document styled as Iqrar Nama
Moida, Patta Istmarai (Agreement of lease) does not specify the boundaries of the land.
2. Appellant also stated that findings of fact recorded by both the courts below are based
on no evidence and therefore, perverse, rendering both the judgement liable to be set
aside.
3. Appellant also projected a question of law that is, the document patta nama, the
foundation of this case was document which needs to be compulsorily registered under
section 17(b) of the Registration Act and in absence of such registration, the said
document could not have been relied upon or admitted in evidence by the courts below
even to prove the factum of possession of the plaintiff. He also draws the attention of
the courts to section 49 of the Registration to support his claim.

11
 ARGUMENTS OF THE RESPONDENTS

1. Respondents argues that they were in possession of the land by the virtue of an
agreement dated 06.02.1993 styled as Patta nama moida istamarari executed by the
appellant no.2-Anant Ram in favour of respondents.
2. Therefore respondents filed the civil suit for permanent prohibitory Injunction
restraining the appellants from interfering in the suit land.

12
 INTERPRETATION OF LAW

1. SECTION 100 OF C.P.C – SECOND APPEAL

(1) Save where otherwise expressly provided in the body of this Code or by any other
law for the time being in force, an appeal shall lie to the High Court from every decree
passed in appeal by any Court subordinate to a High Court, on any of the following
grounds, namely:-
(a) the decision being contrary to law or to some usage having the force of law;
(b) the decision having failed to determine some material issue of law or usage having
the force of law;
(c) a substantial error or defect in the procedure provided by this Code or by any other
law for the time being in force, which may possibly have produced error or defect in
the decision of the case upon the merits.
(2) An appeal may lie under this section from an appellate decree passed ex parse.

2. SECTION 49 OF REGISTRATION ACT, 1908

Effect of non-registration of documents required to be registered.—No document required

by section 17 1[or by any provision of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882)], to
be registered shall—
(a) affect any immovable property comprised therein, or
(b) confer any power to adopt, or
(c) be received as evidence of any transaction affecting such property or conferring
such power, unless it has been registered: 54 [Provided that an unregistered document
affecting immovable property and required by this Act or the Transfer of Property Act,
1882 (4 of 1882), to be registered may be received as evidence of a contract in a suit
for specific performance under Chapter II of the Specific Relief Act, 1877 (3 of
1877) 55, 56 [***] or as evidence of any collateral transaction not required to be effected
by registered instrument.] State Amendment Uttar Pradesh: In section 49,—
(i) in the first paragraph, after the words “or by any provision of the Transfer of Property
Act, 1882” insert the words “or of any other law for the time being in force”,
(ii) substitute clause (b) as under: “(b) confer any power or create any right or
relationship, or”,

13
 (iii) in clause (c), after the words “such power”, insert the words “or creating such right
or relationship”,
(iv) in the proviso, omit the words “as evidence of a contract in a suit for specific
performance under Chapter II of the Specific Relief Act, 1877, or”. [Vide Uttar Pradesh
Act 57 of 1976, sec. 34 (w.e.f. 1-1-1977)].

3. SECTION 17 OF REGISTRATION ACT 1908

(1) (a) instruments of gift of immovable property;

(b) other non-testamentary instruments which purport or operate to

create, declare, assign, limit or extinguish, whether in present or in future,
any right, title or interest, whether vested or contingent, of the value of
one hundred rupees, and upwards, to or in immovable property;

(c) non-testamentary instruments which acknowledge the receipt or

payment of any consideration on account of the creation, declaration,
assignment, limitation or extinction of any such right, title or interest; and

(d) leases of immovable property from year to year, or for any term
exceeding one year, or reserving a yearly rent;

12[(e) non-testamentary instruments transferring or assigning any decree

or order of a court or any award when such decree or order or award
purports or operates to create, declare, assign, limit or extinguish,
whether in present or in future, any right, title or interest, whether vested
or contingent, of the value of one hundred rupees and upwards, to or in
immovable property:]

PROVIDED that the State Government may, by order published in the Official Gazette,
exempt
from the operation of this sub-section any leases executed in any district, or part of a
district, the
terms granted by which do not exceed five years and the annual rent reserved by which
do not
exceed fifty rupees.

(2) Nothing in clauses (b) and (c) of sub-section (1) applies to-

(i) any composition-deed; or

(ii) any instrument relating to shares in a joint Stock Company,

14
notwithstanding that the assets of such company consist in whole or in
part of immovable property; or

(iii) any debenture issued by any such company and not creating,
declaring, assigning, limiting or extinguishing any right, title or interest, to
or in immovable property except insofar as it entitles the holder to the
security afforded by a registered instrument whereby the company has
mortgaged, conveyed or otherwise transferred the whole or part of its
immovable property or any interest therein to trustees upon trust for the
benefit of the holders of such debentures; or

(iv) any endorsement upon or transfer of any debenture issued by any

such company; or

(v) any document not itself creating, declaring, assigning, limiting or extinguishing any
right, title or interest of the value of one hundred rupees and upwards to or in
immovable property, but merely creating a right to obtain another document which
will, when executed, create, declare, assign, limit or extinguish any such right, title or
interest; or

(vi) any decree or order of a court 13[except a decree or order expressed

to be made on a compromise and comprising immovable property other
than that which is the subject-matter of the suit or proceeding;] or

(vii) any grant of immovable property by government; or

(viii) any instrument of partition made by a revenue-officer; or

(ix) any order granting a loan or instrument of collateral security granted

under the Land Improvement Act, 1871, or the Land Improvement Loans
Act, 1883; or

(x) any order granting a loan under the Agriculturists Loans Act, 1884, or
instrument for securing the repayment of a loan made under that Act; or

14[(xa) any order made under the Charitable Endowments Act, 1890, (6 of
1890) vesting any property in a Treasurer of Charitable Endowments or
divesting any such treasurer of any property; or]

(xi) any endorsement on a mortgage-deed acknowledging the payment of the whole

or any part of the mortgage-money, and any other receipt for payment of money due
under a mortgage when the receipt does not purport to extinguish the mortgage; or

(xii) any certificate of sale granted to the purchaser of any property sold

15
by public auction by a civil or revenue-officer.

15[Explanation: A document purporting or operating to effect a contract

for the sale of immovable property shall not be deemed to require or ever
to have required registration by reason only of the fact that such
document contains a recital of the payment of any earnest money or of
the whole or any part of the purchase money.]

(3) Authorities to adopt a son, executed after the 1st day of January, 1872,
and not conferred by a will, shall also be registered.

16
 CONCRETE JUDGEMENT

From the conjoint reading of Section 17 and section 49 of the Registration Act, it clearly
transpires that the document if unregistered but is required to be compulsorily registered under
Section 17 cannot be admitted in evidence to prove its terms and conditions, however, the same
can be looked into for a collateral purpose. The nature and possession of the party indicated in
such a document could be collateral purpose and therefore, the document can be considered to
prove such nature of possession. The answer to the substantial question of law No.2 has been
given in the light of discussion made during the course of the arguments, though, there was no
factual foundation laid for its adjudication. This is so, because it has not been convincingly
demonstrated before this Court that the document which purports to be a lease agreement was
one reserving yearly rent exceeding Rs.50 per annum For the foregoing reasons, I find no merit
in this appeal. The same is, accordingly, dismissed along with connected CM(s).

17
 CASE ANALYSIS

• In the case given above the conflict is regarding a immovable property which was given
on lease but the actual amount of the agreement is not paid, only a small portion of the
said amount was given by the party. The agreement of lease was unregistered and
according to section 17 and 49 of registration, a document if admissible as a evidence
in court must be registered under the said acts.
• The judge above discussed about the about the non-registration of the document
required to be registered which was given in section 17 of registration act, 1908 :-

(a) affect any immovable property comprised therein, or

(b) confer any power to adopt, or
(c) be received as evidence of any transaction affecting such property or
conferring such power, unless it has been registered:

• But if there is an unregistered document affecting immovable property

and required by this Act or the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, to be
registered may be received as evidence of a contract in a suit for specific
performance under Chapter II of the Specific Relief Act, or as evidence of
any collateral transaction not required to be effected by registered
instrument.

Effects of collateral damage is also being discussed which is given in Section 49 of the
Indian registration act, 1908 which is best explained in K.B. Saha and sons Pvt. Ltd.
M/S Development Ltd.2

(1) A document required to be registered is not admissible into evidence

under section 49 of the Registration Act.

(2) Such unregistered document can however be used as an evidence of

collateral purpose as provided in the proviso to section 49 of the
Registration Act.

2
(2008) 8SCC 564

18
 (3) A collateral transaction must be independent of or divisible from the
transaction to effect which the law required registration.

(4) A collateral transaction must be a transaction not itself required to be

effected by a registered document that is a transaction creating etc. any
right, title or interest in immovable property of the value of Rs. 100 and
upwards.

(5) If a document is inadmissible in evidence for want of registration none

of its term can be admitted in evidence and that to use a document for
the purpose of proving an important clause would not be allowed to
used it as collateral purpose.
• It is well settled that an unregistered document cannot be received in evidence of any
transaction covered by registered document.3 However,
such unregistered document can be used as an evidence of collateral purpose, as
provided in the proviso to Section 49 of the Registration Act.4 The aforesaid law in
based on the premise that such document maybe required in evidence to prove the
factum of a transaction, though not of its content.5 Furthermore, such an exception does
not apply unless the transaction has been reduced to a document form.6 There is
plethora of cases which has firmly laid down that under the proviso to Section 49 of the
Act, an unregistered document can also be admitted into evidence for a collateral
fact/collateral purpose.7 However, in order to admit such document even for collateral
purpose, the document so tendered must be duly stamped or should comply with the
requirements of Section 35 of the Stamp Act, without which, such document cannot be
received in evidence unless duty and penalty are paid under Section 35 of the Stamp
Act.8 In G. Balakishtiah vs. B. Ranga Reddy,9 it was held that unregistered lease deed

3
RAGHUNATH AND ORS. v. KEDAR NATH, AIR 1969 SC 1316
4
S. KALADEVI v. V.R. SOMASUNDARAM AND ORS. (2010) 5 SCC 401
5
NAND SINGH v. SEVA SINGH; AIR 1959 PUNJ 609
6
DILEEP DALAL, MULLA ON THE INDIAN REGISTRATION ACT, 10TH ed., BUTTERWORTHS, NEW
DELHI, NARSI v. PURSHOTTAM (1928) 52 BOM 875
7
K.B SAHA AND SONS Pvt. Ltd. v. DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANT Ltd., (2008) 8 SCC 564, PARA 17
8
AVINASH KUMAR CHAUHAN v. VIJAY KRISHNA MISHRA, (2009) 2SCC532; T. BHASKAR RAO v.
T GABRIEL AND ORS., AIR 1981 AP 175
9
AIR 1960 AP 112

19
 can be admissible in evidence for proving appellant’s (who was owner of the land in
dispute) title to the leased property. Similarly in Hemanta Kumari Debi v. Midnapur
Zamindari Co.,10 Privy Council had held that the admission of title in the unregistered
lease deeds can be admissible as evidence. More recently in Shibani Basu v. Sandip
Ray,11 Supreme Court held that non-registration of a rent note did not debar use of a
document that was to be compulsorily registered, for collateral purposes.
• The term “collateral purpose” is often used along with the expression ‘collateral
transaction’. Explaining the meaning of the expression, ‘collateral transaction’, the
Bombay High Court in Ramlaxmi vs. Bank of Baroda,12 observed that such an
expression “is used not in the sense of an ancillary transaction to a principal
transaction or a subsidiary transaction to a main transaction. The root meaning of the
word ‘collateral’ is running together or running on parallel lines. The transaction as
recorded would be a particular or specific transaction. But it would be possible to read
in that transaction what may be called the purpose of the transaction and what may be
called a collateral purpose, the fulfilment of that collateral purpose would bring into
existence a collateral transaction, a transaction which may be said to be a part and
parcel of the transaction but none the less a transaction which runs together with or on
parallel lines with the same.”However, it is to be noted that the precise meaning and
examples of collateral purpose is not exhaustively defined. The meaning of ‘collateral
purpose’ may vary depending on the nature of the agreement or document. For instance,
in case of lease deed, the term ‘collateral purpose’ would mean proving the nature and
character of possession and the purpose of leasing out. Similarly, an unregistered sale
deed would be admissible in evidence for collateral purpose to limited extent of
showing possession of a party to suit. In Ratan Lal and Ors. v. Harisankar and Ors.,13
it was observed that collateral purpose has a limited scope and meaning and it cannot
be used for the purpose of saying that the deed created or declared or assigned or limited
or extinguish the right to immovable property. If a mortgage deed is not registered, the
mortgagor cannot use it to prove his right of redemption for that is not a collateral
purpose.14 However, the simple devise of calling it a “collateral purpose”, a party

10
AIR 1919 PC 79
11
AIR 2011 SC 509
12
AIR 1953 BOM 50
13
AIR 1980 ALL 180
14
BHUKAN MIAN v. RADHIKA (1938) 176 IC 35

20
 cannot use the unregistered document in any legal proceedings to bring about indirectly
the effect of which it would have had if registered. 15

• Therefore taking all the points given above into consideration, and jointly reading
section 17 and 49 of the registration act, 1908 that is a document which is unregistered
and is compulsorily registered under section 17 is inadmissible in the court but
according section 49 same can be used for collateral purpose. Therefore given by the
court is the most appropriate one as there was not any factual foundation in the merit
of the appeal.

• In addressing issue no. 1 that is, Whether this case suffers from any perversity or not ?.
Court said that High court under Section 100 CPC, in normal circumstances does not
interfere with findings of the lower court except when the findings are based on no
evidence or when relevant admissible evidences have not been considered. The
Supreme court summed up the scope of interference of the High Court in the concurrent
finds of the facts while considering the civil second appeal in the case of Gurdeep Kour
and others v. Kaki and others16 which was recapitulated by supreme court in the case of
Narayanann Rajendran and another Vs. Lekshmy Sarojini and others.17

• In the case of Thiaagarajan and others v. Sri Venugopala Swamy B.Koil and others18,
it was held by the supreme court that High Courts in its jurisdiction under section 100
of CPC is not justified in interfering with the findings of the lower courts. Further
clearing on the subject Supreme court said that the obligation of the courts of law is to
further clear the intention of legislation and not condemn them by excluding the same.

15
AIR 2004 AP 243

16
2007 (1) SCC 546

17
(2009 (5) SCC 264)

18
(2004)5 SCC 762

21
 It also said that High court in the second appeal cannot substitute its own findings on
re-appreciation of the evidence merely on the ground that there was the possibility of
another view. It is essential in the second appeal that court must restrict its decision on
the question of law only.
• The findings of facts recorded by the courts below are required to be appreciated. It
may be noted that the suit filed by the respondents before the trial Court was essentially
a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction claiming a decree of restraint against the
appellants from interfering in their possession. The title to the suit property was, thus,
not an issue before the trial Court. The respondents were required only to prove
sufficiently and demonstratively that they were in settled possession of the suit property
and therefore, said right to protect their possession against the appellants. On the basis
of the pleadings of the parties, the documentary and oral evidence recorded during the
trial, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the respondents have sufficiently proved
that they were in possession of the suit property and therefore, deserve to be protected
against the attempt of the appellants to interfere with their peaceful possession.
• Therefore in the light of the legal principles given above the court is of the view that
the concurrent findings of facts returned by the trial court and the first appellate court
are not perverse and therefore, do not call for interference by the High Court in the Civil
second appeal.

22
 CONCLUSION

The well settled principle of collateral purpose as to when Courts can look into
the unregistered documents for collateral purpose. By a catena of decisions, it is well settled
that the documents which are inadmissible for want of registration may sometimes be
admissible for any collateral purpose i.e. for any purpose other than that of creating, declaring,
assigning, limiting or extinguishing right to immovable property. Subletting is transfer of
limited right of Tenant under the lease. The clause of subletting cannot be dissociated and
considered separately in isolation. Any authority or consent for subletting cannot be said to be
for collateral purpose. Therefore court is justifies in giving the said decision.

23
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. MULLA, The Transfer of Property act.

2. The Transfer of property Act by Dr. AVATAR SINGH
3. The Transfer of property Act by S.N. SHUKLA
4. The Transfer of property Act by Dr. R.K. SINHA

24