JAI BHAGWAN Vs. RAJESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS suit has been filed by the plaintiff seeking cancellation of sale deeds registered vide registration No. 13194 additional book No. 1 Volume No. 2321 pages 72 to 92 dated 30th September 2005 and No. 13195 Additional Book No. 1 Vol. No. 2312 Pages 93 to 113 dated 30th September 2005 executed by plaintiff in favour of defendants No. 1 to 3. It is pleaded by plaintiff that plaintiff had inherited 21 bighas and 14 biswas of ancestral agricultural land situated in village Mundhela Khurd, New Delhi and defendants No. 1 and 4 through one Jitender son of Sh. Mukhtiar Singh in September 2005 approached plaintiff as they were desirous of purchasing 10 bighas and 17 biswas of land out of the plaintiff's land. Plaintiff agreed to sell 10 bighas and 17 biswas of land @ Rs. 20 lac per acre. However, no agreement to sell was prepared and only an oral understanding was reached. Defendant No. 4 paid a sum of Rs. 20 lac to the plaintiff and remaining amount of Rs. 23. 40 lac was to be paid within six months time. Defendants prepared a sale deed having date of 30th September 2005 and asked plaintiff to put his signatures on this without explaining the contents of the sale deed. The plaintiff, being an illiterate and poor person, put his signatures on the sale deed in bona fide belief that the sale deed was only one sale deed for 10 bighas and 17 biswas. Accordingly, plaintiff executed the sale deed before the Sub Registrar IX where also contents of the sale deed were not explained to the plaintiff. The defendants had disclosed to him that the sale deed was only for 10 bighas and 17 biswas. It is stated that since the balance amount of more than Rs. 20 lac was not paid by defendants, the possession of this land was not handed over to the defendants. Plaintiff asked the defendants to make payment of remaining amount but defendants did not make payment. On 8th march 2008, all of a sudden defendants No. 1to 4 along with Mr. Jitender and some other unknown persons came to the plaintiff and demanded ownership and possession of the entire land i. e. 21 bighas and 14 biswas. This came as a shock to the plaintiff since plaintiff had sold only 10 bighas and 17 biswas of land and plaintiff had been continuously in possession of land. Plaintiff resisted the illegal demand of defendants of seeking possession of entire land. Plaintiff pleaded that he never sold the entire land to the defendants and the remaining amount of Rs. 23. 40 lac was still not paid by defendants to the plaintiff, even if the land of 10 bighas and 17 biswas was considered sold by the plaintiff. It is pleaded that the defendants, out of fraud and in connivance and collusion with other persons, got signed two sale deeds instead of one, each for 10 bighas and 17 biswas and grabbed the entire land of the plaintiff and he was not even paid the balance consideration for 10 bighas 17 biswas of land amounting to rs. 23. 40 lac The plaintiff prayed that both the sale deeds be declared null and void since both were got registered by defendants as a result of fraud, deception and cheating. The Plaintiff alleged that he learnt about this fraud on 4th April 2008 when he obtained copies of the sale deeds and also copies of mutation. Plaintiff thereafter filed a complaint with SHO Police Station jafarpur Kalan against the defendants and also filed a complaint to SDM, SW district, Nazafgarh for cancellation of mutation done in favour of defendants in respect of entire land of plaintiff. It is submitted that after coming to know of the complaint lodged by plaintiff, defendants No. 1 to 4 approached plaintiff and executed a GPA dated 7th April 2008 in respect of one half of undivided shares in 8 Bighas of land out of Khasra No. 439 mentioned in the sale deed. It is pleaded that this GPA itself shows that the defendants were involved in a fraud. It is submitted that the consideration as mentioned in the sale deed no. 13195 had not passed to the plaintiff neither plaintiff sold the land. The consideration in respect of sale deed No. 13194 has also not passed to the plaintiff in full and the balance of Rs. 23. 40 lac was still payable to the plaintiff.

(2.) A perusal of documents filed by the plaintiff would show that both the sale deeds were executed by the plaintiff in favour of defendants on the same day. The first sale deed No. 13194 is in respect of an agricultural land measuring 10 bighas and 17 biswas falling in different Khasras for a consideration of Rs. 17,62,500/- and the second sale deed is in respect of another 10 Bighas 17 Bidwas for a consideration of Rs. 17,62,500/ -. At the time of registration of sale deed, Sub Registrar issued a certificate that the contents of documents were explained to both the parties (including the plaintiff) and who understood the conditions and admitted execution of the sale deed. The Sub Registrar also noted that he had satisfied himself that the documents were duly executed after receipt of entire consideration and prior receipt of consideration in cash was admitted.

(3.) THE normal procedure followed for sale of a piece of agricultural land is that the owner of the agricultural land first has to apply to the Land revenue Authorities and obtained a No Objection Certificate. For obtaining No objection Certificate, he has to make an application to the Revenue Authorities giving the details of the land to be sold, what area of the land would be left with him after sale, to whom it was being sold. The NOC application is to be accompanied by the agreement entered into with the seller. As per the provisions of Delhi Land Reforms Act, a holder/bhumidar of an agricultural land cannot sell part of the land unless a minimum of 8 Standard Acres of land is left with him as his own holdings or he has to sell his entire land. No objection Certificate is not issued by Land Revenue Authorities unless the minimum holdings of land left with the Bhumidar is not less than 8 Standard acres (one standard acre of agricultural land constitutes 4 bighas and 16. 2 biswas of land) or nil. Thus, no permission would have been granted to the plaintiff to sell 10 bighas and 17 biswas of land since the left out land with the plaintiff would have been only 10 bighas and 17 biswas i. e. 2. 26 Standard acres. The plaintiff has not disclosed to the Court as to when did he apply for no objection certificate to revenue authorities, permission was sought for selling how much of the land and to whom. It is also to be noted that No objection Certificate granted to the plaintiff has not been made part of the record and deliberately so since NOC would have brought out the truth. It is apparent that the plaintiff had approached the Court with unclean hands.