In Brief
A dispute arose over possession of a 3-acre-20-gunta field. The plaintiff claimed title under a registered sale deed from the defendants. The defendants' second member later disputed the transaction, claiming it was a sham document executed as security for a money loan, not a genuine sale. The trial court accepted this argument and dismissed the suit. The First Appellate Court reversed, finding the sale deed valid. The High Court restored the trial court's dismissal, invalidating the deed under the Fragmentation Act. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that a registered sale deed whose execution is admitted carries a presumption of genuineness. The burden lay on the defendant to prove otherwise, but his oral evidence could not override the clear, unambiguous registered deed. The Court also found the defendant had not properly pleaded or counter-claimed the Fragmentation Act issue and could not rely on it without specific averments.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.