In Brief
The appellant challenged a 1973 sale of his ancestral property, arguing it was a mortgage (not an absolute sale) and claimed a right to redeem it. His father had sold the property to Rudramma for ₹5,000 when the appellant was a minor, and a separate Reconveyance Deed (signed the same day) allegedly granted a five-year option to repurchase. The Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of the suit. Interpreting Section 58(c) of the Transfer of Property Act 1882, the Court held that where the sale and condition of repurchase are in two separate documents, the transaction is a sale with a personal right to repurchase—not a mortgage. The complete transfer of ownership and mutation of property in the vendee's name confirmed absolute sale. The appellant's right to repurchase expired after five years, and the suit was time-barred.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.