ALIKUNJU IBRAHIMKUTTY Vs. ABDUL KHATHIRUKUNJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has arisen challenging the Judgment and decree delivered by the Principal Sub Judge, Quilon in O. S. No. 13 of 1986. The defendant is the appellant. The plaintiff respondent filed the above suit for declaration that Ext. A - 1 document dated 26th June 1984 (sale deed) is null and void to set aside the same, to declare the title of the plaintiff, for perpetual injunction etc. The trail court decreed the suit declaring that the plaint schedule property belongs to the respondent plaintiff, that Ext. A - 1 sale deed is null and void and that the appellant defendant is restrained from executing any document in respect of the plaint schedule property. Hence the appeal.

(2.) The averments of the respondent plaintiff are that he purchased 4 acres and 72 cents of property under Ext. A - 5 sale deed dated 1st November 1982, out of which an extent of 85 cents was given to his daughter. He wanted a loan of Rs. 15,000 from the appellant, for which the appellant wanted a security by way of a sale deed in respect of the suit property measuring 3 acres 87 cents. Accordingly, on receipt of Rs. 1,5,000 the respondent executed Ext. A - 1 sale deed as a security with an agreement that on payment of the above said sum of Rs. 15,000 with interest the property would be reconveyed to the respondent. There is also a reservation in Ext. A - 1 sale deed towards payment of a loan amount of Rs. 25,000 to the Bank and that amount was also paid by the respondent. It also indicates that Ext. A - 1 was executed as a security.

(3.) The above averments of the respondent were denied by the appellant on the ground that the suit property was purchased for a sale consideration of Rs. 40,000. On the date of the execution of Ext. A - 1 , Rs. 15,000 was paid to the respondent. The appellant was put in possession of the property on that day. The bank loan referred to by the appellant was paid by the appellant. Only the appellant permitted the respondent to stay in the building for some time and that does not confer any title on the respondent. The Trial Court as. noted above, granted the reliefs sought for.