MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |     Dowry Death | Presumption Under Section 113-B Not Applicable as No Proof of Cruelty Soon Before Death : Supreme Court    |     Land Acquisition | Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. (JAL) Liable for Compensation under Supplementary Award, Not Ultra-Tech Cement Ltd.: Supreme Court    |     Non-Mentioning of Bail Orders in Detention Reflects Clear Non-Application of Mind: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order    |     Conviction Under Arms Act and Criminal Conspiracy Quashed Due to Non-Seizure of Key Evidence and Failure to Prove Ownership of Box: Jharkhand High Court    |    

"Unregistered Mortgage Deed Invalid: Chhattisgarh High Court Upholds Trial Court’s Judgment in Property Dispute"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Chhattisgarh High Court, presided over by Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas, reaffirmed the importance of legal formalities in property transactions. The court, on March 14th, 2024, dismissed the First Appeal No. 171 of 2017, filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, by appellant Hetram Sahu, challenging the trial court's decision that declared a mortgage deed null and void.

The dispute centered around a property transaction dating back to September 20, 2006, between Hetram Sahu (appellant/defendant No.1) and Ramlal Chouhan (plaintiff/respondent). The plaintiff accused the defendant of deceitfully executing a mortgage deed instead of a rent agreement. This deed came to the plaintiff's notice only in 2012 during a proceeding under Section 145 of the Cr.P.C.

Justice Vyas, in his judgment, emphasized the legal requirements for a valid mortgage, stating, "It is a mortgage by conditional sale. The issue with regard to mortgage has recently come up for consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No 706 of 2015 decided on 18-8-2023 in case of Prakash (dead) by LR vs. G. Aradhya and others." The court found the mortgage deed in question to be a conditional sale, which did not fulfill the necessary conditions outlined in Section 58(c) of the Transfer of Property Act.

Furthermore, the judgment highlighted the importance of registration under the Registration Act, 1908, for properties valued over Rs. 100. "If the sale property is more than Rs. 100/- then it should be registered document," the court observed, underscoring the invalidity of the unregistered mortgage deed in this case.

The court dismissed the appeal, affirming the trial court's decision in favor of Ramlal Chouhan and highlighting the necessity of registration for the legitimacy of property transactions. This judgment serves as a crucial reminder of the legal intricacies in property dealings and the consequences of neglecting procedural compliance.

Date of Decision: 14-03-2024 

HETRAM SAHU Vs. RAMLAL CHOUHAN AND OTHER

Similar News