SHEO NAYAK Vs. SARASWATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - This is a second appeal filed by the plaintiff-appellant in a suit for cancellation of sale-deed dated 25-10-1969 and for possession in respect of plot no. 246. The plaintiff-appellant has filed the suit with the allegations that he obtained a permission of the Settlement Officer of Consolidation as required by Section 5 (c) (ii) of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (lor short the Act) in respect of plot no. 246 area 4 biswa 17 dhurs, which was actually sold to the defendants and the remaining two plots, namely, plot nos. 158 and 245 in respect of which permission of the Settlement Officer of Consolidation was obtained under section 5 (c) (ii) of the Act but the sale-deed was not executed by the plaintiff-appellant. In respect of the plot which was sold, the sale consideration of Rs. 4200/- was also taken back by the vendees from the Registrar. In this way it was alleged that the sale-deed was without any consideration and fraudulently, the same was obtained in respect of only one plot, where as the permission of Settlement Officer of Consolidation was obtained in respect of three plots, the sale-deed was illegal and deserves to be cancelled and the possession of the plot may by handed over to the playoff.

(2.) THE suit was contested by the defendant-respondents denying the plaint allegations and alleged that even in respect of plot no, 246 the sale- deed was executed by the plaintiff-appellant and the same was valid and legal and under law it was not aeeessary that in respect of all the plots in respect of which the permission was obtained, the vendors were bound to execute the sale-deed, nor vendee was found to purchase all the plots.

(3.) . Mo body has appared lor the respondents and no assistance has been obtained in reply to the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant.