What does it cost to can­cel a sale deed?

The pay­ment of court fee is sig­nif­i­cantly high and de­pends on the kind of le­gal re­lief sought by par­ties

HT Estates - - HTESTATES - Su­nil Tyagi

Our pre­vi­ous col­umn ad­dressed the le­gal­i­ties of can­cel­la­tion of sale deed of an im­mov­able prop­erty. To sum­marise, where sale of im­mov­able prop­erty has been made ab­so­lute by trans­fer of own­er­ship of the prop­erty from the seller to buyer, the sale deed may be sub­se­quently an­nulled or can­celled by the par­ties only by ex­e­cut­ing a con­veyance deed for re-con­veyance. In civil suits for can­cel­la­tion of sale deed, court fees is usu­ally sig­nif­i­cantly high, which is why it is im­por­tant to also un­der­stand court fee im­pli­ca­tions.

Na­ture of le­gal re­lief

The court fee which is payable by a lit­i­gant in a civil suit is closely linked to what kind of le­gal re­lief he is seek­ing. Let’s take an ex­am­ple of X and Y who both want to seek le­gal re­lief of can­cel­la­tion of sale deed in two in­de­pen­dent cases.

In the first case, X is a buyer who, af­ter ex­e­cu­tion of the sale deed, sub­se­quently dis­cov­ered that the seller had mis­rep­re­sented ma­te­rial facts of the prop­erty. Hence, X wants to have the sale deed an­nulled. In the sec­ond case, Y is a joint owner of an un­di­vided prop­erty, who dis­cov­ers that his co-owner has sold the en­tire prop­erty to a third per­son, with­out tak­ing Y’s con­sent and with­out hav­ing made Y a party to the sale deed. The main dif­fer­ence above is that while X is a party to the sale deed of which he seeks can­cel­la­tion, Y is not a party to the sale deed in ques­tion. How­ever, the law pro­vides for both X and Y to have their re­spec­tive sale deeds an­nulled. Al­though X and Y are su­ing for an­nul­ment of sale trans­ac­tion, there is a dif­fer­ence in the form of le­gal re­lief they are en­ti­tled to seek and court fee im­pli­ca­tions.

This dif­fer­ence was high­lighted in Suhrid Singh Sar­dool Singh v Rand­hir Singh and oth­ers (2010). In this case, the Supreme Court held that if a per­son seek­ing an­nul­ment is a party to the deed, he should seek the re­lief of can­cel­la­tion. On the other hand, a per­son who is not a party to a deed but whose in­ter­ests are af­fected by it, may seek the re­lief of dec­la­ra­tion. Both cases have very dif­fer­ent court fee im­pli­ca­tions.

THINKSTOCK

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.