RAHUL Vs. ALLIED REALITY PRIVATE LTD. AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rahul, the appellant filed a suit, impleading M/s.Allied Reality Pvt. Ltd., Satish Kumar, J.P.Jain and Dheeraj Kumar as defendants No.1 to 4 respectively. He pleaded that he was born on March 12, 1990. He pleaded that 4 bigha and 8 biswa land comprised in Khasra No.444 in the revenue estate of village Kadipur Kaushak was inherited by him and his brother Dheeraj Kumar (defendant No.4) on the death of their father on January 17, 1998 and their names were mutated as the owners of the land in the revenue record. He pleaded that in the first week of April 2008 he received a notice from the Tehsildar to appear before him on April 07, 2008 concerning some mutation proceedings pertaining to the land in question and when he went to the office of the Tehsildar he learnt that on the strength of a sale-deed dated September 20, 2006 executed by J.P.Jain in favour of M/s.Allied Reality Pvt. Ltd. the said company had applied for mutation of the suit land in its name. He pleaded that he learnt that on the strength of an unregistered power of attorney allegedly executed by him on May 18, 2004 in favour of his brother Dheeraj, in turn Dheeraj had executed a registered power of attorney in favour of Satish Kumar (defendant No.2) on May 19, 2004 and that on the strength of said power of attorney Satish Kumar had executed an unregistered power of attorney on June 18, 2004 in favour of Sh.J.P.Jain (defendant No.3), and on the strength of said chain of power of attorneys the sale-deed dated September 20, 2006 was executed by Sh.J.P.Jain in favour of the defendant No.1 company. He pleaded that he had never executed any power of attorney on May 18, 2004 and further pleaded his legal incapacity to do so by pleading that born on March 12, 1990 he was a minor on May 18, 2004 and could thus not empower his brother to sell his half share in the suit land. On these pleadings Rahul pleaded that the sale-deed dated September 20, 2006 be cancelled. The alleged power of attorney executed by him on May 18, 2004 be declared null and void and that the power of attorneys dated May 19, 2004 and June 18, 2004 be also declared null and void.

(2.) On being served with summons in the suit, defendants No.1, 3 and 4 chose not to appear and defend the suit. Only defendant No.2 defended the suit, and in the written statement he raised the plea of res-judicata in the following words:-

(3.) On the pleadings of the parties vide order dated September 27, 2010 the following 5 issues were settled:-