KALUBHAI RANCHHODBHAI PATEL Vs. JIVRAJBHAI M. PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) xxx xxx xxx.

(2.) The Third Court found that prima facie plaintiff has proved that he had a prior agreement to sell in his favour. The original defendant No. 6, the power of Attorney holder, was throughout present, even during the course of subsequent transaction inasmuch as he was the person who was present and signed as attesting witness when some other person has raised claim of prior transfer of property to himself and had objected to transfer of property to the present appellants. The plaintiffs had direct knowledge from the beginning about the transaction under the agreement alleged to have taken place with the plaintiff. At this stage of proceedings the vendors could always be attributed with the knowledge of the previous transaction in respect of the property which has been subjected to latter transaction. The fact whether the purchaser had knowledge about existence of prior agreement, being a fact primarily in the personal knowledge of purchaser primary burden to prove that he was a bona fide purchaser for value without notice rests with him.

(3.) This is in consonance with principle enunciated by Privy Council in Shankarlal Narayandas Mundade v. The New Mofussil Co. Ltd. and Ors. in AIR 1946 Privy Council 97, wherein the board relying on its earlier decision in Lim Charlia and Anr. v. Official Receiver reported in AIR 1934 pg. 68 and opined that: