Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: (a) Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882) & Contract Act (IX of 1872): ----S. 55, S. 56, S. 65 Contract Act, 1872 Sale Agreement—Obligation to Transfer Title—Frustration of Contract—Refund of Purchase Money Appellant entered into a sale agreement with the respondent for a shop and received Rs. 800,000/- as part of the consideration—Agreement stipulated that possession would remain with the appellant until full payment, with title transfer upon final settlement—However, before completion of the transaction, the shop was demolished by the authorities under S. 133 Cr.P.C. due to illegal encroachment—Respondent sought either possession or a refund of the amount paid—Held, under S. 55 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, a seller is deemed to contract with the buyer that he has a valid and transferable title—Failure to transfer title due to a legal impediment rendered the agreement void under S. 56 of the Contract Act, 1872, as performance became impossible—Under S. 65 of the Contract Act, when an agreement becomes void, any benefit received must be restored—As the appellant could not legally transfer title, he was bound to return the amount received—Symbolic possession did not constitute fulfillment of contractual obligations where title transfer was a fundamental requirement—Trial Court's decree directing refund of Rs. 800,000/- was upheld. ---Cited Legal Principles: • Seller is obligated to provide marketable title and ensure lawful transfer. • A contract rendered impossible to perform due to external circumstances is void. • Any party who received a benefit under a void contract must restore it. ----Disposition: Appeal dismissed. Trial Court's decree for refund of Rs. 800,000/- upheld.