"X" purchased From "Y "a piece of land through registered sale deed in 1965. At the time of purchase, sec 47 of Tenancy Act required permission to be taken from Tahsildar "X" did not take permission in the year 1965. Sec 47 was deleted in 1969 in 2018 after 53 years "Y "s legal heirs filed suit for cancellation of registered sale deed on the ground that the transaction is invalidated by operation of Sec 47 of Tenancy Act. REMEDY AVAILABLE TO " X " - ? Does limitation Act save "X"- ? IS THE SALE VOID AB-INITIO-?
1. If Tahsildar permission is a mandatory condition in s. 47 of tenancy act then sale transaction without permission becomes invalid
2. Subsequent deletion of s. 47 does not matter
3. However X has perfected his title by way of adverse possession of 53 years
4. Suit filed by legal heirs of Y is barred by limitation
5. Take out an application raising preliminary issue of limitation and pray for dismissal of suit on basis of being barred by limitation and thus being a stale claim
prior permission of Tehsildar was necessary for sale of land
2) since permission was not taken sale can be set aside
3) the issue would be what was seller or legal heirs doing for 53 years
4) full sale consideration has been paid to seller
5) if sale is set aside seller legal heirs should pay sale consideration with interest to purchaser
When there is no provision existing now it cannot be challenge. With regard to period of limitation, any documents may challenge with in 12 years from the date of registration only. X saves in all manner. All the best.
Period of limitation is over the legal heirs must satisfy the court what they were doing for so many years. The suit will be barred by law. File an application under order 7 rule 11 for dismissal of plaint.
Secondly if the prior permission of Tehsildar was necessary for sale of land since permission was not taken sale can be set aside. But since you are in possession for so long the suit is barred by law of limitation.
Dear Client,
First of all claim barred by Limitation.
Sale is not void,
Since sec 47 stood deleted, it is no more imperative to show that any such permission was obtained nor the absence would invalidate either the transaction or the possession of the land in the hands of alienee or transferee and in view of repeal of Section 47 of Tenancy Act with effect from 18-3-1969 all previous transactions are in no way affected.
See the sale deed is not valid as there was a provision in effect and no requisite permission under which was taken.
But the entire consideration was paid, you have the possession of property from 53 years therefore you have valid adverse possession of property.
Further the suit is barred by the limitation. The plaintiff in court has to explain why after so many years it has came before court and even entire amount of consideration was paid.
@adv Yogendra , thanks for the reply....but there are division bench judgements which invalidated such sale deeds. i am surprised, Law of Limitation could not rescue any of these sale transactions. The courts should see beyond the veil to stop litigations on this ground.
Citation ?
Issue has been reached to SC but not discussed as limited issue was before the bench was if such possession constitute an act of grabbing answered in negative.
Theory of Adverse possession and doctrine in pari delicto cannot be discarded in favor of purchaser, Your case requires deep study,
Sale would be set aside as condition precedent for obtaining prior permission of Tehsildar was not satisfied
See there are different cases and different footings in your case all amount was paid, the deed was registered though a permission was not there so the court will judge it from different prospective and the law of limitation can also help along with adverse possession.
The said sale can be set aside as the permission from Tehsildar can not taken under S. 47, but the legal heirs of Y would have to explain the reasonable cause for approaching the court after 50+ years as the Limitation period for challenging any deed is 12 years.
Hence, chances getting a condonation of delay of 40+years are bleak.
The cancellation of registered sale deed at this stage may be barred by limitation act
You can file your counter seeking to dismiss the suit on this point itself.
The provision of law by which they have filed this suit is not maintainable ion law under this situation.
Law of Limitation could not rescue any of these sale transactions. The courts should see beyond the veil to stop litigations on this ground.
You have no other life jacket to swim across the current litigation since they have used this provision, however the limitation and adverse possession shall be your weapon to defend your interests