In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court has clarified that a person seeking declaration of title over a property is not required to also seek cancellation of a sale deed executed by another party with whom the plaintiff has no direct legal connection. The bench comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan delivered this judgment in Hussain Ahmed Choudhury & Ors. v. Habibur Rahman (Dead) Through LRs & Ors., allowing the appeal and restoring the trial court's ruling.
"The declaration of title is as good as a relief of cancellation of the sale deed or at least a declaration that the sale deed is not binding on the plaintiff being void and thus non est," stated Justice Pardiwala in the judgment.
Read Also:- Supreme Court: Disciplinary Proceedings Beyond Court-Ordered Time Without Extension Are Illegal
Case Background
The case stemmed from a dispute over land transferred through a registered gift deed in 1958. The original plaintiff, grandson of the donor, claimed rights to the land. Later, in 1997, the defendants sold a part of the same land despite lacking title. The trial court and the first appellate court upheld the plaintiff's title. However, the High Court reversed the decision, reasoning that the plaintiff did not challenge the sale deed executed in favour of the defendants.
The Supreme Court disagreed with this view, holding that:
“Where the executant of a deed wants it to be annulled, he must seek cancellation. But if a non-executant seeks annulment, he only needs to seek a declaration that the deed is invalid, void, or not binding on him.”
Read Also:- Kerala Waqf Board Challenges Waqf Amendment Act in SC, Calls It Unconstitutional and Against Secularism
The Court stressed that the relief under Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act does not always require further relief if the existing relief of declaration suffices. The Court emphasized that the law does not compel a plaintiff to sue for all possible reliefs, particularly if they are not directly connected to the main cause of action.
The bench concluded that the plaintiff's claim over the property, based on a valid gift deed, stands, and there was no obligation to cancel a sale deed he was not a party to.
"It is logically impossible for the plaintiff to seek cancellation of a document to which he was not a party," the Court observed.
Case Title: HUSSAIN AHMED CHOUDHURY & ORS. Versus HABIBUR RAHMAN (DEAD) THROUGH LRs & ORS.
Appearance:
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Parthiv K. Goswami, Sr. Adv. Ms. Diksha Rai, AOR Ms. Atiga Singh, Adv. Ms. Apurva Sachdev, Adv. Mr. Piyush Vyas, Adv. Ms. Purvat Wali, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Jaiswal, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Avijit Roy, AOR
