Law: Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)

Section: 55(6)(b) , 9

Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)--- ----Ss. 55(6)(b) & 91---Charge under S.91---Passing of order of allotment and order for delivery of possession in respect of land reverting to the State and under mortgage ---Allottees can ' claim title to land and can seek redemption as charge-holders---Absence of registered deed of. conveyance or agreement of sale not executed---Immaterial---Doctrine of promissory estoppel applies---Evidence Act (I of 1872), S.115. Where the Collector passed allotment order and also order for delivery of possession in respect of certain land that was under mortgage and had reverted to the State and the allottees deposited mortgage amount, the allottees would become entitled in law to claim title to the land and seek delivery of possession of the allotted land to them and to ask for a charge, in the absence of delivery of possession, over the property for the money deposited by them under the allotment order even if no registered deed of conveyance or agreement of sale had been executed by the Govt. By reason of the two orders the allottees had acquired a right under the doctrine of promissory estoppel to call upon the Govt. to regularise the allotment if for any reason the order made by the Collector was defective in any manner. Viewed from this angle, there was no room whatever for any plea that the allottees would not constitute the buyers of the land and were therefore, not entitled to claim a charge over the allotted land under S.55(6)(c). The logical consequence would then be that as charge-holders the allottees would be entitled under section 91 of the Act to seek the redemption of the mortgage. ILR 1967 Guj 323; (1960) fit Bom. LR 940; AIR 1941 Lah. 407 and ILR 24 Mad. 171 ref. Anil Dev Singh, Senior Advocate and Satish Vij for Appellants. V.C. Mahajan and K.S. Sidhu, Senior Advocate with Ms. S. Janani, Mrs. Urmila Kapur and K.L. Taneja, Senior Advocate for Respondents. JUDGMENT S. NATARAJAN, J.--This appeal by special leave by the defendants is directed against a judgment of the High Court affirming the decree for possession passed by the trial Court and the first appellate Court in favour of the respondents/plaintiffs.…