PUTTASWAMY GOWDA AND ORS. Vs. VENKATAPPA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS regular second appeal is preferred by the appellants who are legal representatives of the original defendant against the respondents, who were the plaintiff and defendant No. 1(e) respectively, being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the first Appellate Court in R.A. No. 4/2000 dated 5.1.2006. The appellants have challenged the validity and correctness of the said order on the grounds as mentioned in serial Nos. 5 to 16 of the appeal grounds.

(2.) WHILE admitting the appeal, this Court has framed the following substantial question of law:

(3.) DEFENDANT has filed his written statement. He has admitted that plaintiff was the owner of the suit schedule property. But he has denied all the allegations made against him. It is contended that plaintiff has ceased to be the owner of the schedule property by virtue of the sale deed executed in favour of the defendant. He has also denied the allegations made by the plaintiff that the defendant has committed fraud on the plaintiff and the said document was obtained by misrepresentation as alleged in the plaint. He has also denied the allegation regarding the contention of the plaintiff that the consideration amount though agreed at Rs. 10,000/ - it was mentioned as Rs. 4,000/ - only in that document. It is contended that against the order of rejection by the Sub -registrar defendant preferred an appeal before the District registrar and Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore and as per the order of District Registrar dated 11.5.1987 in R.A. No. 5/78 -79 the sale deed dated 20.6.1978 was executed by the plaintiff in favour of the defendant and the same was registered by the Sub -registrar, Ramanagaram. Hence, he has sought to dismiss the suit of the plaintiff.