LIVE Online Course on NDPS by Riva Pocha and Adv. Taraq Sayed. Starting from 24th May. Register Now!!
LAW Courses

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More


  • The Supreme Court observed that the payment of price is a fundamental part of a sale deal. If a sale deed in regards of an unflinching property is executed without the payment of price and in the event that it doesn't accommodate the payment of price at some day in the future, it's anything but a deal at all according to law, the bench consisting Justices Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka stated.
  • The court additionally also observed that a document which is void need not be tested by guaranteeing an affirmation as the said plea can be set up and demonstrated even in collateral procedures.


  • Name of the case: Kewal Krishan vs Rajesh Kumar Case
  • In this case, Kewal Krishan executed a legal authority for Sudarshan Kumar on 28th March 1980.
  • Following up based on the said legal authority, two sale deeds were executed by Sudarshan Kumar on 10th April 1981. The principal sale deed was executed by him by which he suspected to offer a part of the suit properties to his minor sons. The deal consideration was displayed as Rs.5,500/ - .
  • The other deal deed was executed by Sudarshan Kumar for his wife in regards of outstanding part of the suit properties. The consideration displayed in the deal deed was of Rs.6,875/ - .
  • Kewal Krishan filed two separate suits. One was against Sudarshan Kumar and his two sons and the other one was against Sudarshan Kumar and his wife. Both the suits, as initially documented, were for directive controlling the respondents from meddling with his ownership and from estranging his portion in the suit properties.
  • Alternatively, a plea was made for passing an announcement for ownership.


  • The Trial Court excused the suits filed by Kewal Krishan. In request, the District Court partly announced the suits.
  • The High Court held that the suits for demonstrating the invalidity of the sale deeds were banished by constraint as the said plea was behind schedule joined on 23rd November 1985.
  • In appeal, it was argued that there was no evidence cited to show that the buyers under the sale deeds dated 10th April 1981 had paid consideration to Sudarshan Kumar, and that the minor sons of Sudarshan Kumar and his wife had no ways of earning.
  • The court noticed that no evidence was cited by Sudarshan Kumar about the payment of the price referenced in the sale deeds just as the earning capacity at the important time of his wife and minor sons. Consequently, the sale deeds should be held as void being executed without consideration, the court added.
  • On the issue of constraint, the bench stated:

"It was not necessary for the appellant to specifically claim a declaration as regards the sale deeds by way of amendment to the plaint. The reason being that there were specific pleadings in the plaints as originally filed that the sale deeds were void.A document which is void need not be challenged by claiming a declaration as the said plea can be set up and proved even in collateral proceedings. Hence, the issue of bar of limitation of the prayers for declaration incorporated by way of an amendment does not arise at all."


  • Can a Sale Deed be executed without consideration ?
  • What will be the legal consequence of a sale deed executed without payment ?

Share your views in the comments section below.

"Loved reading this piece by Yogeshwari Sirsikar?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"

Tags :

  Views  126  Report

Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query