MEREY JOSEPH Vs. DEVASSY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Admitted on the following substantial questions of law:

(2.) Respondent/plaintiff filed that suit to set aside Ext. B7, sale deed No. 2946 of 2005 (a copy of which is marked as Ext. A3) and for a decree for prohibitory injunction against trespass into the suit property. Respondent claimed that he is the owner in possession of 14.16 Ares in survey No. 174/7-A2 and 4.21 Ares in survey No. 174/7-A1 as per sale deed No. 2073 of 1978 (Ext. A1). The suit property excludes 3.88 Ares respondent had sold as per document No. 2072 of 2000 (Ext. A2). Appellant is the sister of respondent. Respondent and the late husband of appellant were engaged in joint business. The husband of appellant was keeping the document of title of the respondent. Respondent learnt that after the death of her husband, appellant fraudulently created document No. 2946 of 2005 (its copy is Ext. A3 and the original is Ext. B7) as if respondent transferred the suit property to the appellant. Respondent asserted that he has not executed any such document in favour of the appellant, the document is the result of forgery, that he continued to be in possession of the suit property and hence prayed for the reliefs first above mentioned.

(3.) Appellant contended that she purchased the suit property as per Ext. B7, assignment deed No. 2946 of 2005 executed by the respondent for consideration and is in possession of the said property since the date of assignment. She denied the allegation that the document was forged. She also raised a contention that