The Madras High Court passed a judgement on 26th of April, 2023 in which it dismissed an appeal under S.100 of CPC on the basis of an oral transfer. This was seen in the case of Mariyammal v. Atchanna and Anr. (S.A.(MD)No.687 of 2021 and C.M.P(MD)No.9153 of 2021) and the case was presided over by The Honourable Mr. Justice Abdul Quddhose
FACTS OF THE CASE:
The appellant had filed this second appeal against the order of the District Munsif Court, Kovilpatti. In the original suit the appellant was the defendant. The original suit had been filed against the defendant for a permanent injunction restraining him from interfering with the plaintiffs’ peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property.
The defendant claimed that the property was transferred to her husband by way of an oral transfer. She also claimed that the petitioners were also liable for adverse possession. The defendant could not however prove the same and the decision was given in favour of the plaintiff of the original suit. Thus, this appeal.
The learned single judge after listening to the contentions of both parties, upheld the order of the lower court. The court voiced that under Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, any transfer of tangible immovable property, valued above Rs.100, can be made only by a registered instrument. Thus, oral transfers are invalid.
The appellant also has not produced any documents proving his title while the plaintiffs of the original suit have. The appellant has also failed to prove that the respondent has indeed adversely possessed the suit property. Thus, the Second appeal stands dismissed.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY SWETA SHOUMYA