Summary
A defendant resisting a possession suit argued that the plaintiff’s registered sale deed had not been proved through attesting witnesses. The Court upheld the High Court’s decree, holding that a sale deed does not require attestation and that execution was adequately proved on the admitted facts.
Issues
- Whether a registered sale deed must be proved by examining an attesting witness under Section 68 of the Evidence Act.
- Whether the plaintiff established a better title supporting recovery of possession against this defendant.
Held
- Unlike a gift under Section 123 of the Transfer of Property Act, a sale governed by Section 54 does not require attesting witnesses. Section 68 of the Evidence Act, concerning proof of documents required by law to be attested, did not apply to the sale deed. (¶ 19–20)
- The defendant admitted the housing society’s title. The plaintiff entered the witness box and proved execution, and no legally sustainable objection was taken to exhibiting the deed. On those admitted facts the deed was duly proved and supported the plaintiff’s better title. Registration alone was not treated as dispensing with all proof. (¶ 21–22)
- The first appellate court had rejected adverse possession and the cooperative-jurisdiction bar; those findings had attained finality in this litigation. The remaining issue was proof of the sale deed, which the High Court correctly resolved in the plaintiff’s favour. (¶¶ 11–13, 17–23)
Result
Appeal dismissed; High Court decree for possession in favour of the plaintiff upheld.