1993 (9) TMI 370 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
- Suit for declaration of possession exchange
- Defective title of the first respondent
- Compensation for loss of land
- Possession of the appellant disputed as tenant-at-will
- Interpretation of Section 119 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882
- Reliance on Jamabandi entries for possession

Analysis:

The plaintiff filed a suit seeking a declaration that the first respondent had exchanged possession of certain land, which was decreed by the trial court but overturned on appeal. The plaintiff had exchanged his land with the first respondent, who later faced a defect in title due to a civil suit by minor sons of the original seller. As a result, the plaintiff had to surrender a portion of the land to the minors. The first respondent then delivered a different portion of land to compensate for the loss. The key issue was whether the plaintiff was in possession of the exchanged land as a tenant-at-will, as claimed by the first respondent.

The court referred to Section 119 of the Transfer of Property Act, which holds a party liable if the other party is deprived of the exchanged property due to a defect in title. The plaintiff was deprived of a portion of the land due to the defect in the first respondent's title, making the first respondent liable to return that portion to the plaintiff. The court found that the entry in the Jamabandi supported the plaintiff's claim of possession in exchange, despite the first respondent's claim of the plaintiff being a tenant-at-will.

The court rejected the first respondent's claim that the plaintiff was a tenant-at-will, as no rent was paid after the exchange. The court deemed the first respondent's argument as false and desperate, especially since no compensation was paid for the loss suffered by the plaintiff. The court concluded that the appellate court's decision was perverse and illegal, setting it aside and restoring the trial court's decree in favor of the plaintiff. The appeal was allowed with costs throughout, highlighting the importance of upholding contractual agreements and protecting parties from fraudulent claims.