Registered sale deed and unilateral alteration: post-execution interpolation without purchaser consent cannot override original terms.

Section 47 of the Registration Act, 1908 makes a registered sale deed operative from the date of execution where consideration is fully paid, but it does not permit a vendor's unilateral interpolation after execution to displace the deed's original terms. Any alteration made without the purchaser's knowledge or consent is ineffective and must be ignored. The text also states that, under Section 41 of the Punjab Courts Act, 1918, second appellate interference is justified where the lower appellate decision is contrary to law, including by ignoring the effect of Section 47. The original sale deed therefore prevails unless the purchaser consented to the change.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a unilateral interpolation made in a sale deed after its execution but before registration could override the original terms of the deed; (ii) Whether the High Court was justified in interfering in second appeal under Section 41 of the Punjab Courts Act, 1918.

Issue (i): Whether a unilateral interpolation made in a sale deed after its execution but before registration could override the original terms of the deed.

Analysis: Section 47 of the Registration Act, 1908 governs the time from which a registered document operates. A registered sale deed, where the consideration has already been paid, operates from the date of its execution. Section 47 does not determine when a sale is completed, but only the date from which a registered document becomes operative. A change made by the vendor after execution and without the purchaser's knowledge or consent cannot displace the deed as originally executed. Such unilateral alteration is to be ignored unless it is shown to have been made with the purchaser's consent.

Conclusion: The sale deed as originally executed prevailed, and the unilateral interpolation made before registration did not affect the purchaser's title.

Issue (ii): Whether the High Court was justified in interfering in second appeal under Section 41 of the Punjab Courts Act, 1918.

Analysis: Under Section 41 of the Punjab Courts Act, 1918, a second appeal lies where the decision is contrary to law. The first appellate court's view, which ignored the effect of Section 47 of the Registration Act, 1908, was contrary to law. That provided a valid basis for interference in second appeal.

Conclusion: The High Court was justified in interfering with the first appellate court's decision.

Final Conclusion: The High Court's restoration of the trial court decree was sustained, and the appellants were not entitled to relief.

Ratio Decidendi: When consideration is fully paid and a sale deed is registered, the document operates from the date of execution under Section 47 of the Registration Act, 1908, and any unilateral alteration made after execution without the purchaser's consent is ineffective; a second appellate court may interfere where the lower appellate decision is contrary to law.

---