S G RAJU Vs. RAJAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful plaintiff is the appellant. The plaintiff filed the suit for declaration and injunction or in the alternative recovery of possession. The case of the plaintiff/appellant was that he purchased the suit property from the second defendant, who is none other than his mother-in-law, for a valuable consideration under a registered sale deed dated 2.6.1974. The first defendant is the wife of the plaintiff and the third defendant is the daughter of the second defendant. The property was purchased by the plaintiff from out of his income from military service and as he was in military service, he allowed his mother-in-law and sister-in-law to stay alongwith his wife in the suit property. Since the relationship between the plaintiff and his wife got strained, the defendants refused to vacate the property and also disputed the title of the plaintiff and therefore, the suit was filed for the above relief.

(2.) The defendants filed written statement stating that though the property was purchased in the name of the second defendant, it belonged to her husband and after purchasing the vacant site, the husband of the second defendant constructed a house and he died in the year 1972 and at that time, his brother and his son claimed some right over the property and therefore, for the purpose of safeguarding the property, a nominal sale deed was created in favour of the plaintiff and the sale deed dated 2.6.1974 was only a sham and nominal document and no title passed under that document and no consideration was also passed as stated in that document and even after the execution of the said sale deed, the defendants are in possession of the property as absolute owners and they are paying tax therefor. The plaintiff is having illicit intimacy with another woman and he filed application for divorce from his wife, the first defendant in O.P. No. 130 of 1980 and that was dismissed and the appeal filed against that judgment and decree was also dismissed and having realised that he cannot get divorce from his wife, he has filed the suit claiming that he is the owner of the suit property.

(3.) Both the Courts below held that the sale deed Exhibit A-2 was a sham and nominal document and no title passed under that document and therefore, the plaintiff is not entitled to the relief prayed for.