Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Property Dispute Over Lease Deed Validity — Lease Deed Held to Be Valid and Binding Despite Lack of Registration Under Section 107 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The Court restored the trial court's decree for possession in favor of the lessee, finding the lease deed was for a fixed term and not required to be registered.

In Favour of Prosecution
  • 4577
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute pertains to a property described in Schedule 'A' of the plaint, originally owned by Late Anima Bose. On 23.03.1998, Anima Bose executed a lease deed (Ext. 1) in favor of the appellant, Vivekananda Kendra, for a period of 11 months, for the purpose of running a centre and carrying out the aims and objects of the Kendra. The lease deed was not registered. Anima Bose died on 07.03.2007. The respondents, who are the legal heirs of Anima Bose, allegedly dispossessed the appellant from the suit property. The appellant filed Civil Suit No. 100/524 of 2011-2005 before the Civil Judge, Baripada, seeking a decree for possession and permanent injunction. The trial court decreed the suit in favor of the appellant, holding that the lease deed was valid and the respondents had not acquired title by adverse possession. The first appellate court affirmed the trial court's decree. However, the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, in RSA No. 123 of 2021, reversed the concurrent findings and dismissed the suit, holding that the lease deed was invalid for want of registration and that the respondents had perfected title by adverse possession. The Supreme Court, in the present appeal, examined the validity of the lease deed under Section 107 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and Sections 17(1)(d) and 49 of the Registration Act, 1908. The Court held that a lease for a fixed term not exceeding one year is not required to be registered and is valid. The Court further held that the respondents failed to prove adverse possession as their possession was permissive under the lease. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and restored the decree of the trial court and first appellate court, allowing the appeal.

Headnote

A) Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Section 107 - Lease Deed - Validity - A lease deed for a fixed term not exceeding one year is valid even if not registered, as it is not required to be made by registered instrument under Section 107. The lease deed in question was for a period of 11 months, hence valid without registration. (Paras 10-12)

B) Registration Act, 1908 - Sections 17(1)(d) and 49 - Registration - Lease Deed - A lease deed for a term not exceeding one year is not compulsorily registrable under Section 17(1)(d). Non-registration does not render the lease invalid or inadmissible for collateral purposes. (Paras 10-12)

C) Adverse Possession - Claim - Burden of Proof - The respondents failed to prove their claim of adverse possession as they did not establish exclusive, hostile, and continuous possession for the statutory period. The possession of the respondents was permissive under the lease, and they could not convert it into adverse possession without clear evidence. (Paras 14-16)

D) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Section 100 - Second Appeal - Interference - The High Court erred in interfering with the concurrent findings of fact by the trial court and first appellate court, as no substantial question of law arose. The High Court's re-appreciation of evidence was impermissible in a second appeal. (Paras 17-19)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the lease deed (Ext. 1) dated 23.03.1998 executed by Late Anima Bose in favor of the appellant is valid and binding on the respondents, and whether the respondents have acquired title by adverse possession over the suit property.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court, and restored the decree of the trial court and first appellate court, decreeing the suit in favor of the appellant.

Law Points

  • Transfer of Property Act
  • 1882 (TPA) provisions on lease cancellation and notice requirements
  • Indian Penal Code
  • 1860 (IPC) sections on trespass and fraud
  • principles of bona fide purchaser for value without notice
  • maintainability of suits for declaration under civil law
  • interpretation of lease deeds and unilateral cancellations
  • burden of proof in civil suits regarding fraudulent transactions
  • Lease deed for a fixed term not exceeding one year is valid without registration
  • Section 107 Transfer of Property Act
  • 1882
  • Section 17(1)(d) Registration Act
  • 1908
  • Section 49 Registration Act
  • Lease deed for manufacturing purpose is not a lease from year to year
  • Oral lease coupled with possession is valid
  • Adverse possession claim requires clear and unequivocal evidence
  • High Court's interference in second appeal is limited to substantial questions of law
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (SC) (01) 96

Civil Appeal No. of 2026 @ Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 9558 of 2023

2026-01-01

S.V.N. Bhatti

2026 INSC 199

Mr. Rutwik Panda (for Appellant), Mr. Ashok Panigrahi (for Respondents)

The General Secretary, Vivekananda Kendra

Pradeep Kumar Agarwalla and Others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil suit for possession and permanent injunction based on a lease deed.

Remedy Sought

The appellant (plaintiff) sought a decree for possession of the suit property and permanent injunction against the respondents (defendants).

Filing Reason

The respondents allegedly dispossessed the appellant from the suit property after the death of the lessor, Anima Bose.

Previous Decisions

The trial court decreed the suit in favor of the appellant; the first appellate court affirmed; the High Court in second appeal reversed and dismissed the suit.

Issues

Whether the lease deed (Ext. 1) dated 23.03.1998 is valid and binding on the respondents despite not being registered. Whether the respondents have acquired title by adverse possession over the suit property. Whether the High Court was justified in interfering with the concurrent findings of fact in a second appeal under Section 100 CPC.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the lease deed was for a fixed term of 11 months and did not require registration under Section 107 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and Section 17(1)(d) of the Registration Act, 1908. Respondents argued that the lease deed was invalid for want of registration and that they had perfected title by adverse possession.

Ratio Decidendi

A lease deed for a fixed term not exceeding one year is valid without registration under Section 107 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and Section 17(1)(d) of the Registration Act, 1908. The respondents failed to prove adverse possession as their possession was permissive under the lease. The High Court erred in interfering with concurrent findings of fact in a second appeal without a substantial question of law.

Judgment Excerpts

Leave Granted. We have heard Mr. Rutwik Panda, learned Counsel for the Appellant, and Mr. Ashok Panigrahi, learned Senior Counsel, for the Respondents. The Civil Appeal arises from the judgment and decree dated 23.12.2022 in RSA No. 123 of 2021 in the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack. On 23.03.1998, during the lifetime, Late Anima Bose, executed Exhibit 1, termed as a 'lease deed' in favour of the Vivekananda Kendra. The lease deed was for a period of 11 months. A lease for a fixed term not exceeding one year is not required to be registered under Section 107 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The respondents failed to prove adverse possession as their possession was permissive under the lease. The High Court erred in interfering with the concurrent findings of fact in a second appeal without a substantial question of law.

Procedural History

The appellant filed Civil Suit No. 100/524 of 2011-2005 before the Civil Judge, Baripada, seeking possession and injunction. The trial court decreed the suit. The first appellate court affirmed. The respondents filed RSA No. 123 of 2021 before the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, which reversed the concurrent findings and dismissed the suit. The appellant then filed Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 9558 of 2023 before the Supreme Court, which was converted into the present Civil Appeal.

Acts & Sections

  • Transfer of Property Act, 1882: Section 107
  • Registration Act, 1908: Section 17(1)(d), Section 49
  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Section 100
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Property Dispute Over Lease Deed Validity — Lease Deed Held to Be Valid and Binding Despite Lack of Registration Under Section 107 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The Court restored the trial court's decree for pos...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Unreliable Child Witness. Conviction under Section 302 IPC set aside as sole testimony of child witness was found untrustworthy and not corroborated by other evidence.