SAJRUNNISHA Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition, the petitioners are challenging the order dated 22.2.2000 passed by the respondent no. 1, District Judge, Siddharth Nagar.

(2.) The facts of the case, in brief, are that one Masammat Aisha, mother of the petitioners filed a suit for cancellation of the sale deed which was alleged to have been executed by Massamat Aisha in favour of respondent no. 2-Smt. Badrunnisha. The case of Smt. Massamat Aisha was that she was an illiterate lady and was the sole owner of the disputed property but by fraud practised upon her, the husband of respondent no. 2 got the sale deed executed in favour of his wife Smt. Badrunnisha by showing himself as the witness in the sale deed. The contention of Massamat Aisha was that in the sale deed there was no consideration mentioned and it was obtained by fraud. She came to know of this fraud on 19.9.1986 and then she filed the suit no. 637 of 1986 for cancellation of the said sale deed before the civil court.

(3.) Before the civil court, the respondent no. 2 filed her objections that the suit was barred by the provisions of section 49 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 and further objection of the respondent no. 2 was that her name had been recorded in the revenue records prior to the filing of the suit and, therefore, the suit was not maintainable before the civil court and if at all, only the Revenue Court had jurisdiction. However, the respondent no. 2 insisted that the sale deed dated 13.1.1977 was a genuine document and same cannot be questioned.