https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293486 An exchange of immovable property worth more than Rs. 100 could not be effected orally, because rights in such property had to be created or transferred through a registered instrument; an unregistered arrangement could not affect title or support the mutation, and a sale founded on that invalid exchange could not stand. The alleged exchange also could not bind the plaintiffs because no authority of their father to act for them was proved, and the first appellate court erred by accepting unsupported inferences and shifting the burden. The appellate decree was set aside and the trial court's decree in favour of the plaintiffs was restored. en-us Mon, 01 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Feb 2021 20:41:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293486 An exchange of immovable property worth more than Rs. 100 could not be effected orally, because rights in such property had to be created or transferred through a registered instrument; an unregistered arrangement could not affect title or support the mutation, and a sale founded on that invalid exchange could not stand. The alleged exchange also could not bind the plaintiffs because no authority of their father to act for them was proved, and the first appellate court erred by accepting unsupported inferences and shifting the burden. The appellate decree was set aside and the trial court's decree in favour of the plaintiffs was restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 01 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293486