MOHAMMED USMAN Vs. GANGA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this instant appeal, the appellant challenged the validity and legality of impugned judgment and decree dated 27.11.2008 passed by learned 8th Additional District Judge (FTC), Raipur in suit No.18A/2007, whereby learned trial Court allowed the suit filed by plaintiff for cancellation of sale deed dated 29.05.2000 executed by defendant- 1 in favour of defendant - 2 and for possession of disputed property.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are that respondent1/ plaintiff filed suit for cancellation of sale deed and possession of suit property situated at village Jaunda, tehsil- Abhanpur, Patwari Halka No.155, Khasra No.446 Rakba- 1.445 hector of land. The aforementioned property is agricultural property. It was pleaded in her suit that the suit property is her father's property, namely, Sukhuram Satnami, who died in the year 1989. After death of Sukhuram, names of legal heirs including plaintiff was mutated in revenue records, but her brother / respondent- 2/ defendant- 1 was managing the suit property, succeeded from his father, as plaintiff was residing in her matrimonial house at Telibandha. When she came to village Jaunda in month of July, 2006, at that time, she revealed that her brother, defendant- 1 (Ramcharan) sold entire suit property without her knowledge and consent to defendant- 2/ appellant. She pleaded that as the property belongs to her father, she was having right for half share over the suit property. After getting knowledge of selling entire suit property by her brother, defendant- 1, plaintiff obtained required documents from the Revenue Department as well as from the Office of Registrar and filed a suit for cancellation of sale deed and also for possession of suit property.

(3.) Defendant- 2 (purchaser) after receiving notice of the suit, submitted written statement to the plaint and stated that the sale deed executed by defendant- 1 in his favour is valid. After enquiring about the ownership of property he purchased the suit property for valuable consideration. He further stated that revenue record shows that names of plaintiff and her sister Punibai were deleted from revenue records on 001993, whereas, he purchased the suit property on 29.05.2000. Defendant- 1 (Ramcharan) not made his appearance and not submitted his written statement to the plaint.