Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari to quash the registration of the Cancellation of Settlement Deed dated 28.05.2009, registered as Document No. 2188 of 2009, by the 1 respondent, after calling for the records and quash the same.
ORDER
The second respondent is the husband of the petitioner. Earlier, the second respondent executed a Settlement Deed dated 16.07.2004 in favour of the petitioner, who is the wife. Later on, the said Settlement Deed was unilaterally cancelled by the second respondent vide Cancellation of Settlement Deed dated 28.05.2009, which was registered as Document No. 2188 of 2009 on the file of the first respondent. Now, the petitioner has sought to quash the said Cancellation of Settlement Deed.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the unilateral cancellation of Settlement Deed dated 28.05.2009, by the second respondent, registered as Document No. 2188 of 2009 on the file of the first respondent, is opposed to the Full Bench decision of this Court in Latif Estate Line India Ltd. v. Hadeeja Ammal) reported in 2011 (2) CTC 1 and hence, it has to be quashed.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
4. It is not disputed by the learned counsel for the second respondent that unilateral Cancellation of Settlement Deed is bad as has been held by the Full Bench of this Court in the judgment referred to above. Further, according to the learned counsel for the second respondent, the second respondent has filed a suit seeking for declaration that the Settlement Deed dated 16.07.2004 executed in favour of the petitioner, is sham and nominal.
5. In the light of the Full Bench Judgment referred to above, the Writ Petition is allowed. The connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs. However, it is made clear that the order passed herein could have no bearing to decide the issues that would arise in the suit filed by the second respondent in the competent Civil Court seeking to declare that the earliest Settlement Deed dated 16.07.2004 executed in favour of the petitioner herein, is sham and nominal.
He relied on the following passage in Paragraph 59 of the said judgment, which is as follows:-
“59. After giving our anxious consideration on the questions raised in the instant case, we come to the following conclusion:
(i) A Deed of Cancellation of a sale unilaterally executed by the transferor does not create, assign, limit or extinguish any right, title or interest in the property and is of no effect. Such a document does not create any encumbrance in the property already transferred. Hence, such a Deed of Cancellation cannot be accepted for registration.
(ii) Once title to the property is vested in the transferee by the sale of the property, it cannot be divested unto the transferor by execution and registration of a Deed of Cancellation even with the consent of the parties. The proper course would be to re-convey the property by a deed of conveyance by the transferee in favour of the transferor.”