Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether unregistered lease deeds could be relied upon to prove admissions of title and possession, and whether the appellant had established title and possession over the suit property.
Analysis: The suit turned on the probative value of unregistered lease deeds executed by the lessee's predecessor. Such documents were not admissible to prove the lease as a transfer of interest, but they could be used for collateral purposes, including proving an admission contained in the document. The evidence also showed that the patta stood in the appellant's name and had earlier stood in his father's name. The respondent produced no convincing evidence of original ownership, while the appellant supported his claim by the registered sale deed, revenue records, lease documents, and oral testimony. The admissions in the unregistered documents, read with the surrounding evidence, established that the lessee was the appellant's kauldar and could not confer better title on the respondent.
Conclusion: The appellant succeeded in proving title and possession, and the respondent's objection to the use of the unregistered lease deeds was rejected.
Ratio Decidendi: An unregistered document is inadmissible to prove the transaction itself, but it remains admissible to prove an admission contained in it for a collateral purpose.