A sale deed duly attested and verified by the Sub-Registrar and supported by witness, cannot be deemed fraudulent

Chhattisgarh High Court Upholds Validity of Sale Deed, Overturns Lower Court Ruling. Oral Claims of Fraud and Undue Influence Insufficient Without Documentary Evidence, Rules Court

In a significant judgment, the Chhattisgarh High Court has upheld the validity of a contested sale deed, reversing a previous decree by the First Appellate Court which had favored claims of fraud and undue influence. The case, Lobhan v. Peru, centered around a sale deed executed by the late Mankuwar, an elderly woman, in favor of defendant Lobhan. The plaintiff, Peru, alleged that the deed was a product of fraud due to Mankuwar's poor health at the time of execution.

Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey, presiding over the second appeal, emphasized the insufficiency of oral evidence without corroborating documentary evidence to substantiate claims of fraud and undue influence. The court noted that the sale deed was duly attested by the Sub-Registrar and supported by witness testimony, thereby holding significant weight in affirming its legitimacy.

The dispute involved a property in Village Saigona, which Mankuwar had acquired from her parents. The plaintiff argued that due to her poor health and weak eyesight, Mankuwar was incapable of executing the sale deed. However, the court found no documentary evidence to support these claims, relying instead on the testimony of attesting witnesses who confirmed the execution's legitimacy.

The High Court's decision reinstates the ruling of the Trial Court, which had initially dismissed the plaintiff's suit. The court concluded that the First Appellate Court had misread the evidence, leading to an erroneous judgment. The High Court's ruling underscores the legal principle that mere oral assertions, without documentary backing, cannot invalidate a legally executed sale deed.

The judgment serves as a reminder of the importance of documentary evidence in legal proceedings, especially in cases alleging fraud and undue influence in property transactions.

Bottom Line:

A sale deed executed by the exclusive owner of the property, when duly attested and verified by the Sub-Registrar and supported by witness testimony, cannot be deemed fraudulent or influenced merely on the basis of oral evidence regarding the executant's health condition, in the absence of corroborating documentary evidence.

Statutory Provision(s): Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Section 100

Lobhan v. Peru, (Chhattisgarh) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2785029