In Brief
A respondent purchased land from a housing cooperative society via registered sale deed and discovered the appellant had illegally constructed a hut on it. The respondent sued for possession. The trial court rejected the suit, claiming the sale deed was improperly proved (no attesting witness examined) and the appellant held adverse possession. The high court reversed this, holding the sale deed was validly proved without requiring attesting witnesses, since sale deeds are governed by different rules than gift deeds. The Supreme Court upheld the high court, holding that sale deeds need no attesting witnesses, and where the defendant admits the vendor's title and raises no objection, the deed is duly proved. The appellant's appeal was dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.