RAMANATHAN Vs. VASANTHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is against the order of remand passed by the learned District Judge, Pudukkottai in A.S. No. 159/1993.

(2.) The plaintiffs case is briefly as follows:-

(3.) The defendant in his written statement contends as follows: The plaintiff had sold the property in favour of the defendant on 12-1-1987 for valid consideration received. The allegations that the defendant had agreed to reconvey the property, and had executed a re-conveyance deed in favour of the plaintiff are not true. If the plaintiff wanted any loan from the defendant, fie could have mortgaged the property and obtained a loan and he need not execute a sale deed and get a re-conveyance deed in his favour. The re-conveyance deed is a fraudulent document and the suit is, therefore, liable to be dismissed.