Punjab & Haryana HC: Bona fide purchaser plea rejected—Sale deed void beyond vendor’s 1/3rd share

Case Name: Nardev Singh v. Balwant Kaur @ Kulwant Kaur & Ors.
Date of Judgment: January 9, 2020
Citation: RSA No. 4913 of 2018 (O&M)
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arun Monga

Held: The High Court dismissed the Regular Second Appeal, affirming that a vendee cannot acquire better title than that possessed by the vendor. Since the vendor-son had already been declared owner of only 1/3rd share in earlier litigation, he could not convey ownership of the entire land. The plea of the appellant-vendee that he was a bona fide purchaser relying on revenue entries was rejected, as the vendor had committed fraud by concealing the binding decree.

Summary: The dispute concerned agricultural land measuring 51 kanals 3 marlas, originally owned by Hardam Singh. Upon his death, his two daughters and son inherited equal shares, as declared in a 1994 decree which attained finality up to the High Court. Despite this, the son executed a sale deed in 2009 in favour of the appellant, purporting to sell the entire land. The daughter (plaintiff) challenged this and succeeded before the trial and first appellate courts. In second appeal, the vendee argued that he had made due inquiry and was protected as a bona fide purchaser under Section 41 of the Transfer of Property Act, citing Jagan Nath v. Raj Kumar (1986). The Court rejected the argument, holding that fraud by the vendor could not enlarge the vendee’s rights. Since the vendor had no title over 2/3rd of the land, no valid title could pass for that portion.

Decision: Appeal dismissed. Sale deed and consequential mutation declared illegal to the extent of the plaintiff’s 1/3rd share. Permanent injunction restraining alienation of her share upheld.