 Good evening everyone. And it's always a pleasure when you tie up of beyond law CLC with legal, legal elites and under the ages of Adi Lakshmi Lovamuti. We have taken sessions, which have a different fascinating aspects. And Miss Adi Lakshmi was the connecting point for connecting us with Sringhar Murali who is an important resource person, not only for legal, legal elites, but also when we have been collaborating on the legal knowledge sharing. And as we know that Miss Sringhar Murali has been taking different perspectives of law, which are not only relevant for the purposes of a common man, but also as we find that the legal journey and the legal minds also get eliminated. Once these rights parks have been ignited by persons like resource person of Sringhar Murali. And today there's a fascinating topic of what we say setting aside of the fraudulent CLD without the resorting to the civil code. This aspect looks quite fascinating. And during this legal journey sharing, it will be always quite eliminating as to how it can be done. And it will also not only help the persons like lawyers to understand, but also common man as to how you can come out of the legal trappings of the civil code. And I will not take much time, I will request Adi Lakshmi Ma'am to share the insights regarding Mr Murali as well as knowledge sharing and then we will request Mr Murali to share his knowledge. Adi Lakshmi Ma'am. Thank you so much my dear brother Vikas. It's so nice for legal eagles alike to get connected once again after a long time with the beyond law CLC. And today Shankar Murali sir is very well known, almost all parts of India for this legal knowledge and his wish to share his knowledge free of cost. Sir doesn't take even a single pie for sharing whatever may be the platform, whether it's online or offline. He shares his legal knowledge that he's an exponent in civil law, but he tries his hand sometimes on the criminal jurisprudence as well. Today he has such a great fan following and he's a godfather for all the young lawyers and young law students down south. Today he has been traveling to north and in fact he had recently had an opportunity to meet Vikas and he met and was very happy. COVID-19 had done so much of harm but for the legal fraternity it has done lots and lots of good. And one such goodness is connecting us towards every one of us networking has gone in a larger way and also acquiring the legal knowledge on platforms like this and also the creations of YouTube's to know the sessions even though we missed due to our busy schedule. And today one of the pertinent topic which as Vikas told sir is going to deliberate with us and I wish every one of you is we are going to have a very good session and on my personal behalf I wish my elder brother, our godfather, pattern of legal equalization, our own respected and beloved Shankar Modi sir, thank you so much for joining in on this platform today. On behalf of every one of you, on behalf of beyond law CLC and on behalf of legal equalizing, I extend a very warm welcome to our most respected and beloved faculty of the day, Mr. Shankar Modi sir. Welcome sir to this platform. Thank you. Thank you to Mr. Thank you Vikas ji and Ajay Lechmi madam. Normally I used to take classes for those who are all clacking the judicial exams, students and mainly the raw lawyers. But this is the first time I am going to deliver a judgment on the topic which is burning topic, whether a fraudulent sale deal can be set aside without resorting to the civil court. The law on the subject is well settled. If I want to set aside any document which is against me, if the document is allowed to be in existence and if it cause severe embracement to me and the document is void on the face of the raka, then my remedy is to approach the competent civil court to file a suit for declaration that the document registered is illegal, null and void and not binding on me. This is section 31 of the specific relief. So, all of you know and will quite concur with me. Filing a civil suit and get a remedy that from is a cumbersome process, is a cumbersome process. Of course, to vindicate our legitimate right remedy, we can approach the civil court. Suppose you are the owner of the property, you have not at all sold the property in power of any third parties. You are in possession and enjoyment of the property. You are holding the original sale deed and all the prior title deeds with you. But in one ill fated day, some person can impost by making false personation executed a sale deed in power of a third party in respect of over property. You are not aware of the same. There are chances of impersonation, lot and lot of cases are pending on the subject before the various courts in India. I was wondering why the innocent purchase shall be punished? Is it not amount to causing insult to him? He did not anything wrong. Some person fraudulently executed a registered sale deed. In order to set aside the same, then why should I approach the civil court? Why should I engage in an advocate, pay him a piece and to pay the court fees to set aside the document? And I have to all along wait for the result of the case. Getting a degree from civil court, it may take minimum 5 to 10 years. Thereafter appeal, second appeal, SLP. For no fault on the part of the innocent owner, he is compelled to, he is dragged into the arena of the dispute. So is there any law then how to set that right? How to prevent this menace? So, I have conducted a case before the High Court of Judicature, Madurai Petch, and obtained an order. Because my client's property was sold by an imposter. My client who was in America, taking advantage of his absence in India, is adjacent to owner in conspiracy within some third party. President to service a registered power of attorney, as if my client has executed a power of attorney in his favor to sell the property to my adjacent owner. On the basis of the fraudulent power of attorney, my property was sold in favor of my adjacent owner. Then he occupied my place. On my client's return from America, he was shocked and amazed. And he made a roving inquiry and to his dismay, he came to know that his property was illegally sold. Then he has consulted many advocates. Invariably all of them said the only proper remedy is to file a suit to set aside the sale deed by paying court piece on the amount to mention in the sale deed and get recovery apposition. Then he enquired and finally he came to me. I have produced all the records. In the power of attorney, the photograph of the imposter is fixed. It is not made yet. And his identity card, some voter identity is mentioned. Then we obtained the information with the right information act. And the information was furnished with that effect. The voter ID issued to my so-called power agent is a fake one. He is not at all in existence. He is only a fictitious person. Then we filed an application before the registrar to set aside the fraudulent sale deed. And he conducted a roving inquiry, obtained all the documents. We have produced the original sale deed, revenue records, everything. And they are not in a position to produce the document. Here I would like to tell one thing. Whenever any document is, sale deed is presented for registration. It must, the recital must contain warranty of title. Suppose the sale deed recites like this. I, the owner, hereby convey the property which is all along under my possession. And I have been issued, but I am selling this property to the inverter. This is not a warranty of title. The title deed must state how the vendor acquired title to the property. What are all the prior title documents? How the property was dealt with by the vendor? Whether his name has been muted in the revenue records? So if it contains, then it is a clear case of warranty of title. In the fraudulent sale deed it has been alleged, the original sale deed is missing. They have obtained a certificate from the concerned police that no non-crisable certificate. Based on that, my property was sold illegally. Then the district registrar conducted an inquiry. And he came to a conclusion that it is a fraudulent registration. But he said, it is not within my domain to decide the title to the property or to set aside the fraudulent sale deed. Because the only proper remedy is to approach the certificate. That is the order passed by the registrar. Then straight away I have filed a petition. I don't want to approach the civil court. Because I know being a civil lawyer, it will take years together. Then finally the matter was listed for final hearing. Based on the Satyapal Anand's, which is the state of Mathya Pradesh, the law has of now. Once a document is registered fraudulently, the only remedy open to the affected party is to approach the civil court to get his remedy. Then I have narrated the power of the registrar under section 34 of the registration act and rule 55 and rule 162 of the registration act. What is the power of the registrar? Whether the registrar has got power to inquire before registering the document. Then I quote section 34 and rule 55. Though it is not within the domain of the registrar to decide the title to the property, whether the executor has got the right, absolute right to convey the property, yet he has to satisfy himself that the person appearing before him is the vendor, is the executor, verifying his other card ID and other things. Then only subject to the satisfaction that the person appearing before him is the person professes to be. Then the registrar may register the document. If the document is registered casually without examining the person appearing before him, then in the IAEA of law it is not at all an act of registration. Apart from that, rule 118 of the registration rules says, if it is brought to the knowledge of the registering authority that a particular document is fraudulently registered, then he can make an entry in the encumberment certificate, namely Book 1, that the document is fraudulently registered, there cannot be any further information. That is enough. So I have requested the Honorable Court. Let the registrar make an entry in the Book 1, that is the encumberment certificate maintained by him, that the so-called fraudulent registration is fraudulently registered, it does not convey any title in favor of the purchaser and there cannot be any further information. Apart from that, section 82 deals with penalty for false pressionation. Seven years imprisonment is contemplated, that has been ordered. So the very object of choosing this topic is for the benefit of the legal fraternity and especially to all the civil lawyers. This is a very good interesting subject. I am going to cover the registration act and the rules framed therein the specific relief act, particularly section 31, transfer of property act, particularly section 55 and the various decisions of our Honorable High Court and Supreme Court. My humble submission is, you must know the distinction between void and voidable document A document which is void and the fence of the record, it does not declare to be void by a competent civil court because the document by its nature is void. Suppose any misrepresentation made as to the contents of the document, you may have a loan from your friend, you may be an illiterate person. Instead of executing a mortgage deed, your friend may obtain a sale deed. Then it is voidable at your option. Then necessarily you have to file a suit to set aside the sale deed that maintenance and it is not to execute a sale deed, it is only a mortgage deed. Suppose you are having undivided share in the property, your brother sold not only his share but also including your share he has sold. Naturally you have to file a suit to set aside the sale deed so far as your share is concerned because your brother may take, there is a water partition I have telling you to my share. So the disputed question of facts, the disputed question of facts under the contractual duties and obligation of the parties is not well within the ambit of article 226 of the constitution of India. But in the case of fraudulent sale deed, your duty is cast upon the registering officer to verify whether the executant is the real owner or not. If you file in his duty, then we can approach the high court under article 226 of the constitution of India. Then let us see what is your sale deed? Sale is defined in the section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act. The sale consideration may be passed present or in future. Normally under the contract act, agreement without consideration is void. But here there is a promise even without receiving the sale consideration one can execute a sale deed acting on the promise to pay the sale consideration in future. So sale deed is a document which transfer ownership. The transfer is complete and effective upon the completion of registration of the sale deed. After executing the sale deed, the vendor is divesting his title to the property and the ownership process to the purchase. Pursuing for a moment, I have executed a sale deed in favour of some yet. He has promised to pay the, he has paid certain amount as balance amount and promised to pay the balance sale price in future. But thereafter he failed to pay the balance sale consideration. Then what is my remedy? Can I impeach the sale deed on the ground that I have not received the entire sale consideration? I cannot because under law I am an unpaid vendor. My legal rights and remedy is to file a suit for the recovery of the balance purchase money under section 55 subclass 4 small b of the Transfer of Property Act. And after obtaining a degree, a charge will be created, a statutory charge will be created on the property conveyed till the balance sale price is paid in full. This is the well-settled position of law so far as unpaid vendor, right of unpaid vendor is concerned. Suppose sale deed was executed without consideration or with path consideration. The possession is retained by the vendor himself. The original document is retained by the vendor himself. The intention of the vendor is to pass title only on the payment of the entire sale price. Then title will not pass. Title will not pass. So registration, Prima Vesi is the proof of intention to transfer of the property but not the proof of operative transfer. This has been held in Kalyapuramal v. Rajagopal 2009 for SCC page 193. 2009 for SCC page 193. This is the very landmark judgment. It gives right on the unpaid vendor to impeach the sale deed on the ground that it is not his intention to pass the ownership on the death of execution of the sale deed because the purchaser has to pay the balance sale price unless the balance sale price is paid. It is not my intention to convey the property to pass the ownership. Now, I may be listed in this way. I have paid the entire sale consideration. The sale deed presides. Entire sale consideration is paid and I have executed a registered sale deed in favour of cash. Please note my sale deed contains the registration. After receiving the entire payment I have executed the sale deed. Can I unilaterally cancel the sale deed already registered in favour of X? I have presented the document unilaterally to cancel the document already executed in favour of X. The registered verified the same under registered. Then what is the remedy open to the purchaser X? There are two cosets. Number one, whether the vendor who has received the entire sale consideration without the knowledge and consent of the purchaser can present the document for registration, cancelling the sale deed already affected. If such cancellation of registered sale deed is registered, then what is the remedy available to the purchaser who has paid the entire purchase? Can we compel him to go to civil court to file a suit to set aside that the cancellation of the registered sale deed is illegal and unlawful? What is the remedy? The first one, so far as vendor am concerned under law, I have no authority because sale deed is a bilateral document. It is not a unilateral document as in the case of bill or settlement. There is a corresponding reciprocal process, applications. My purchaser has to pay sale consideration, I have to execute the sale deed. Once I have received the entire sale price, I have to execute the sale deed. It is a bilateral document. Having received the entire sale consideration on my own, I cannot unilaterally cancel the sale deed already affected by me. Number one. So the document is void. It is a fraud. It not only is a fraud and me, it is a fraud and the statute. But rightly or wrongly, the document is registered. Cancellation of registered documents is registered. Then the purchaser filed a repression in Rajil 2.26 for the cancellation of the sale deed stating that I have paid the entire sale price. I was injected into personal property. My name has also been mutated. But illegally my vendor thought my knowledge unilaterally cancelled my sale deed. That has been registered. It is a sale deed on the basis of the record. Cancellation of the sale deed is null and void. Not binding on me. Cancellate. This matter came before the full bench of the Honourable Andhra Pradesh. In Yannala Malleshwari and others, versus Anathila Siamandagos, this is a full bench decision. 2007-1 CTC page 97. It has been held by majority that the registrar has got power to receive, present, to receive the document, cancellation of the registered sale deed. There is no flaw in it. He did his duty. Registration had the empower scheme to receive the document. It may be a cancellation of the registered sale deed. But the dissenting view is very apt. It has been held that the registrar has no power to cancel the registration of the document already registered. Since the registrar becomes a pundit's official once the document is registered. If a person sold away the property belonging to others, then it would be a fraud on stage. If the original owner is asked to go to civil code and get the subsequent sale deed cancelled, the declaration would be adding insult to the injury to the work. So that is a dissenting view. Later in Satyabhaal Anand v. state of Mathya Pradesh, 2015-15 CTC 263. The supreme court gave a conflicting decision by Honourable Justice Deepak Mishra and Honorable Justice Sathananda Gouda. Justice Mishra said, the registrar has got power to register the cancellation of the registration, the cancellation of the registered sale deed, because the registration act empowers him. But Honorable Justice Adhananda Gouda said, no, no, no, it's a fraud under statute. Once a document is already registered, cancelling the same immediately is fraud, it is anality. Then the matter referred to full bench, three bench. Again it has been considered and it is reported in 2016, 10 SEC page 767. 2016, 10 SEC page 767. The Honorable Justice Deepak Mishra judgment was affirmed. So the majority view is, registrar has got power to cancel the registered sale deed already affected. The only remedy open to the party affected is to approach the competent civil court and get his address. Is it not shocking? Please read the judgment in full. That is the case, the petitioner who has filed the petition was allotted a plot by a Punjabi cooperative society. In the bylaw of the society, if the plot already allotted and the sale deed was executed in respect of the sale, if the allotted failed to construct a building within two years, then automatically the plot will be resumed by the secretary of the society and it will be reallotted in power of other persons. The repetition has not constructed the building within this escalated time frame. So therefore that prompted the secretary, straight away he went to the registrar, presented a document for cancellation of the sale deed. It is known as the extinguishment deed that was registered. Then he filed the repetition. Then the court said, no, no, no, this is only a disputed question of facts. It cannot be gone into under Article 226 of constitution. We are not here to decide the private parties, independent rights, go and approach the civil court. So this Satyapal judgment case is only on the voting, the bylaw of the society empowers the secretary of the society to cancel and present a document for registration, cancelling the sale deed and the tea effect. There is no rules in the Mathya Pradesh registration rules, preventing the registrar from registering a cancellation of registered sale. After the full bench decision passed by the Antar Pradesh Yannala Malleshwari case, rule was amended, thereby the registrar is prevented from registering cancellation of the registered sale deed. If the both purchaser and the vendor filed a document for cancellation of sale deed, then it can be registered. Unilaterally it cannot be registered. Similarly, our Tamil Nadu government has also passed a circular by the inspector general of registration. The Tamil Nadu government amended Section 34A of the registration act whereby the purchaser is required to sign the sale. So based on this Satyapal judgment decision, invariably all the high court in India passes an order that whether it may be a fraudulent registration go to court, forgetting for a moment the decision of the Satyapal case is on different votings. Then what about Section 554 subclass B of the transfer of property act? It confers a right on the unpaid vendor to sue for the balance sale price. He cannot impede the sale deed. He cannot file a suit to set aside the sale deed. Suppose the aggrieved person owner has put the order of the high court or supreme court, I have to file a suit to set aside the sale deed. Normally the practicing civil lawyer, what would we do? We cannot file a suit to set aside the sale deed because we have to pay the court piece on the market value of the property and the data filing of the suit. It may be heavy. In order to avoid the payment of court piece, we use to file a suit for declaration that the registered cancellation of sale deed is illegal and not binding on me. We will file a Section 25D and tentatively value the subject matter of the same and we will pay the minimum court fee. So someone issued the defendant appeal. He will not allow us to proceed the case. What they will do, the defendant, he will file an application to reject the client on the ground that the payment subject matter of the suit was improperly valued under the insufficient court fee. So reject the client. Please keep in mind, when you are not a party to the documents, when the document is fraud on the face of the record, when the document is not binding on you, you need not pay court fee on the market value of the suit property or on the amount mentioned in the sale. You just simply ignore the sale. You can very well file a suit for declaration to declare that the registered cancellation of sale deed is illegal and not binding on you. You are fully competent to value the subject matter tentatively and pay the court piece in accordance with your tentative evaluation. He will file this application to reject the client. Then we will argue and file some pretty certain authorities. Then the application will be dismissed. Again, he will not allow you to continue further. He will file, as against the order rejecting his application, he will file CRP, then SLP. Then he will file another application to compare the signature. Our case is that it is not my signature. It is a fraudulent signature. Then he will file, no, no, no. He came and took the document. Only for the purpose of filing this case, he has alleged that it is not his signature. Compare the signature. It must be compared by the expert. Then we are quite sure that it is not our signature. Then we will say, yes, we will, I will subscribe my signature that it be compared. Then he will file another application. If the signature is not his contemporary signature, then this process will go for another two to three years. Even that application is dismissed. Or the expert opinion is produced that it is not our signature. He will not be satisfied. He will file another application for appointment of advocate. Stating that after the sale in his favor, he has developed the property, made some development. That has to be, the physical picture has to be taken note of. So one after another, by filing interlocking application, your adversary will not allow you to get a degree in your favor. So it is a cumbersome process. Why the innocent purchaser must be punished? So this is the right time. Our Tamil Nadu government as far as now has amended inserted section 22B of the Registration Act, empowering the registrar to cancel the document which are fraudulent, which are fraudulent. Normally, the disputed question of facts cannot be decided. Registrar is not a quasi-judicial officer. But in some cases, there are fraudulent registration. So now the government of Tamil Nadu gave power to the registering authority to cancel the fraudulent registration. Now, earlier, the High Court of Madras division bench in ER Kalaiwan versus the Inspector General of Registration, 2010 Madras page AIR 2010, page 18, it has been held that the registering authority has no power to register cancellation of registration documents, cancellation of sales deed filed unilaterally by the Pandora. So as I said earlier, a document which is void, it need not be declared as void. We can simply ignore. This has been held in Prem Singh and others versus Birbal and others 2006 by SCC page 353. Then what is the object of the registration act? The full bench of the Honourable Madras side. In the case, Latif State Lion India Limited versus Mrs. Hadija Amal reported in 2011 to MLJ 569. The object of registering a document is to give public notice to the public at large that the document has been executed to prevent fraud and forgery and to secure a reliable and complete amount of all transactions affecting the title to the public. The object of the registration is not to not merely to collect revenue, it becomes part of public policy. It becomes part of public policy. Document which is against the public morality and public policy is void. Section 23 of the contract act says the fraudulent deed is void. So I am confining the right of the innocent owner of the property to file his repetition under article 226 of Constitution of India for the cancellation of the fraudulent deed. Or he may approach the consent sub-register registering authority with the request that by producing all the documents that the document is fraudulently registered, make an entry in the uncomparent certificate that the document is fraudulently registered and not to and prevent further alienation in future. So these two options, I will answer Mr. Rasho after this session is completed. Now two options are available to the unsold vendor to impeach the fraudulent registration either to approach the registering authority by quoting rule 118 of the registration rules or approach the high court under article 226 for cancellation of the settlement deed. Is there any permission under the registration act? Under what circumstances the register can refuse to register the document? Section 1 of rule 162 of the registration rules contemplates 19 grounds, 19 grounds on which the register may refuse to register it. But all of them are trivial in nature. But rule 55 relative with the section 34 cost upon a duty on the registering authority regarding to identify the executant or the person presenting the document for registration. Now there is only one judgement that is from our Honourable High Court. 2016, 1 CTC, Page 673, 2016, 1 CTC, Page 673 that is in the Asset Reconstruction Company India Limited, Asset Reconstruction Company India Limited versus Inspector General of Registration, 2016, 1 CTC 673. This is a landmark judgement delivered by the Honourable Justice, Mr. M. M. Sundres, ASCII, and now he is Supreme Court Judge. He gave a judgement. In that case, a registered power of attorney was executed by the one-a-half in favour of his power agent. Part of all the acts done by the power agent is embodied in the set power of attorney. In the set registered power of attorney, the power agent has not been given any power to alienate or execute sale deed on behalf of the principle. So the registered power does not empower the power agent to execute sale deed on behalf of the principle. But an unregistered power of attorney is there which empowers the power agent to execute a sale deed on behalf of the principle. Then the power agent prepares a sale deed on behalf of the principle stating there is a registered power of attorney and there which I am fully competent to execute sale deed on behalf of my principle. The registering authority without perusing, he has not produced the unregistered power of attorney because in Tamil Nadu, power of attorney has to be registered. So based on the registered power of attorney, he has presented a document executed a sale deed in favour of some acts. The document was registered. Then the principle, who is affected by the fraudulent registration. Straight away, he has filed a writ of mandamus for directing the registered to cancel the sale. Initially, the mantelor of the red petrion is corset, senior advocates from both sides where are you in length. Then the Honourable Justice set. A duty is cast upon the registering authority to produce the document before registering the document. Production and examination of the document is the part of the registering authority, duty under rule 23 of the registration rules. He failed in his duty. There is a violation of procedure. So he cannot take shelter. This is not a solemn act of registration. It is not a solemn registration in the eyes of law. When the power of attorney does not empower the power agent to execute the sale deed and become the principle, the registration of the sale deed by the so-called power agent in favour of that party is illegal and the sale deed is void and unable to be cancelled. Straight away by invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the order was passed for the cancellation of the fraudulent sale deed. So documents which are voidable, necessarily we have to approach the civil code. But the documents which are void and depends on that account. So the document is presented fraudulently by making impersonation. It will not bind the owner. He need not go to the civil code to get his remedy. His option is now open, either to approach the high court or to the cancelled registrar if the particular state government empowers the registering authority to annul or cancel or resign the document already registered which are all fraudulent in nature. So these are all the decisions now referred to by me are all greater significance. So in future please do not approach the civil code. It is a cumbersome process. The document is fraudulently registered. Approach the concerned registrar or to file a red correction. Definitely you will get a favorable remedy. With this I conclude the session. Though the topic is very small, it involves a lot of legal aspects. And if any question is posted in the chat box. Vikas ji, Vikas, Vikas, Vikas where is Mr. Vikas? I will ask you madam, are you hearing me? Haritha, should we open the chat box? Can specific performance suit filed without issuing notice to opposite party? Mr. Raj posted a question. Can specific performance suit filed without issuing notice to opposite party? Without serving any notice, suit for specific performance will be dismissed Before filing a suit for specific performance, the purchaser has to express his readiness and willingness to purchase the property. Section 16c of the specific impact is very clear. Unless the purchaser express his readiness and willingness to purchase the property, he will not succeed. He has to plead that he is always ready and willing to perform this part of contract. Who is posting this question? Ashok. Answer to Mr. Ashok. If revenue record is written in favor of your purchaser, you can approach the concerned registrar by producing a document that you gave power only in respect of a particular platform. Whereas the sale deed in favor of the purchaser includes the plot which is not mentioned in the power of Patani. And you can also impeach the sale deed by approaching the concerned registrar or to file a repression to set aside the sale deed so far as the portion which is not mentioned in the power of Patani is concerned. I can read it. Thank you. The situation made without agreement is valid which is executable. Mr. Ashok, he has read this one of Vinoth. The message he has been read of Vinoth, principal executing power of Patani. I answered some questions, Mr. Ashok. You can pass up all the questions to me and I will send it to you. Mr. Ashok, Vinoth is asking, in 2008 principal executing power of Patani deed in favor of the agent for selling the land belonging to the principal and gave the sale consideration to the principal. However, the agent has fraudulently sold the land in favor of his wife in 2009 itself. What is the remedy for the principal when civil suit or to approach district court? One second. So once he gave the sale consideration to the principal, there ends the matter. He can execute sale deed in favor of his wife. It cannot be questioned by the principal. Once the principal, after executing the power of Patani, receives the entire sale consideration, it is open to the power of agent to sell the property in either in favor of his wife or in favor of any third party that cannot be challenged. If no sale consideration is filed, then the principal remedy is to file a suit for the recovery of the sale consideration. He cannot impeach the power of Patani. Suppose the power of Patani is canceled, thereafter the sale was affected, then the sale can be impeached by the principal. So without canceling the power of Patani, without sending a notice to the power of agent at any intimating the cancellation of the power of Patani, the principal has no right to impeach the sale deed already affected by his power agent. It says if the mortgager had deposited the property to some other third person, disposed of the property to the third person, however the title deeds are with the bank and it is reflected as a mortgage. What is the remedy? It's not on the chat. It's on the YouTube. YouTube. Please tell me again. What if the mortgager disposes of a part of the property to some third person? One second. Please repeat it again. What if the mortgager disposes of a part of the property to some third person without the knowledge of the bank, though the title deeds are lying with the bank and it is reflected as a mortgage. What is the property? What is the remedy? The remedy of the bank is just to ignore the sale because once mortgage is executed, the bank becomes the security creditor, with the knowledge and consent of the bank if the property is sold, the property is deemed to be sold subject to the mortgage. The bank has got every right to proceed against the property even if it is sold by the smarger. The sale is subject to the mortgage. Even otherwise nobody can sell a better title than what he possesses. Normally once mortgage is executed, it does not prevent the owner of the property to income at the same to sell it. He has got every right. But before selling, he must intimate the same to the mortgage. This is section 68 and 69 of the transfer of property. Even if the mortgager wants to lease out the property, he has to get consent from the mortgage. But there is no prohibition under law. He can sell it. But the sale it must contain that the property hereby conveyed is already subject to the mortgage and you have to redeem the mortgage. Then only the sale is valid. Mr. Ashok, what you are dreading. He said that I am the owner of two different plots in same Khasra. I sold few square yards from... Answer. That has been answered. These are the questions I will just check it out on the YouTube. Yes. If an owner of a property realizes that some third party name is not in the mutation entry, does Limitation Act apply on this and who should approach? But it's also on the YouTube. Please tell me again. If the owner of a property realizes that some of the third party names have been mentioned in the mutation, does Limitation Act apply on this and who should be approached? Once some third party name is muted in the revenue records and the moment he came to know from the data of knowledge, he can straight away approach the consent of Dasildar, our revenue division officer, to remove the entry and seek his remedy. The period of limitation, so far as the cancellation of the illegal entry, Limitation Act does not arise because this is a wrongful act. For the wrongful act, each and every time it gives Khasra action, so there is no time limit. There is no limitation. Section 23 of the Limitation Act, I think so. Even otherwise, this is Kuldeep Singh has also held in Supreme Court that fraud initiates everything. Yes, yes, fraud initiates everything. Fraud is intended to gain illegally. Now, this is the last question. What to do if a genuine document is cancelled to expatriate by the lower moot support based on a fraudulent model? The second last question. Yes, yes, yes. Genuine document is cancelled, expatriate. You have to file an application to set aside the expatriate degree or to file an appeal. By putting forth all your defence. This is if someone has fraudulently given a surety for a loan taken by a company. Company defaults and surety is invoked. What is the remedy for the original owner of the property? What is the surety for which he is given fraudulently? Repeat it again. If somebody property is given a surety falsely, then it will not bind with the original owner of the property and he need not pay any amount to the facts. Because he is not at all a surety. Somebody has given his property a surety. It will not bind him. If any action is taken by the bank, straight away he can file a red petition restricting the bank from proceeding against his property because he is not at all a surety. And his property was given fraudulently a surety. Even he can lodge a criminal complaint also. Another question is that it is not with the topic concerned. So, we are not taking. So, thank you everyone for staying connected with us. And friends, tomorrow we will be having a session on the service law part series with Mr. P. S. Raja Gopal on dispensing of the inquiry proceedings. What are the trappings? I will thank Ari Lakshmi, Lokmoh Murti and the legal elites, Mr. Shingar Murli, who have been always a pleasure connecting with us on this platform. One last question. One last question. One Mr. Chandrasekar is supposed to answer. Vanda received the entire sale consultation and received the document. But run away after prescribing the document before the fundraiser and sold the property to others. Then what is the remedy? Once the document is executed by the Vanda, before ever registering the same key left to the place, you can compel the registrar to file compulsory registration of the document. If the document is subsequently sold, you can file a suit for specific performance compiling the Vanda to register the document in your favor. And you need not ask for cancellation of the sale deed because the document is subject to your sale. Thank you everyone. Stay safe, stay blessed and do stay connected with us tomorrow at 6pm for the Part 5 of the Service Law series by Mr. P. S. Raja Gopal. Thank you.