LAWS(ALL)-2010-8-542

JAGESHWAR AND ORS. Vs. RAM GULAM AND ORS.

Decided On August 23, 2010
Jageshwar And Ors. Appellant
V/S
Ram Gulam And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ONE Bhura had two daughters namely Dulli and Phulia. He transferred his agricultural holding gata No. 146 area 1.129 hectare Dadamau of Pargana, Tahsil and District Banda by registered sale deed dated 16.4.1968 in favour of one of her daughters Smt. Dulli. The said daughter sold the said land in favour of Shiv Narain and Chedi Lal vide sale deed dated 10.6.1968. The aforesaid Bhura executed another sale deed in respect of the said land on 7.7.1975 in favour of Ram Gulam. Bhura had instituted suit No. 274 of 1968 for cancellation of the sale deed dated 16.4.1968. The suit was decreed vide judgment and order dated 1.6.1970 and the same was affirmed in appeal as well as in second appeal which was dismissed some time in 1979. As in the mean time consolidation proceedings started in the village, Chedi Lal who had purchased the aforesaid land from Dulli the daughter of Bhura preferred objections for the purposes of recording his name on the basis of the sale deed dated dated 10.6.1968. The objections were allowed by the order dated 28.4.1981 and the appeal preferred against the same was dismissed. However, in revision, the appellate order as well as the order allowing the objections were set aside and the matter was remanded. Against the said order of remand Chedi Lal has preferred writ petition No. 12678 of 1984.

(2.) DURING the pendency of the writ petition, Chedi Lal transferred the said land vide sale deed dated 23.5.1998 in favour of Jageshwar, Maniram and Hariram. The above Jageshwar, Maniram and Hariram purchasers of the aforesaid land from Chedi Lal instituted original suit No. 360 of 1998 for permanent injunction against the Ram Gulam and others who claimed to be the owner on the basis of the subsequent sale deed dated 7.7.1975 alleged to have been executed by the original tenure holder Bhura. The suit was dismissed and so was the appeal. Therefore, the plaintiffs have preferred this second appeal.

(3.) I have heard Sri R.S. Chauhan, learned Counsel for the petitioners and plaintiff -appellants in appeal and Sri Gulrej Khan, learned Counsel for the respondents in both the cases and with their consent proceed to decide both the writ petition and the second appeal finally.