BEEPAT AND ORS. Vs. SRI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The second appeal has been admitted on the following substantial questions of law :-

(2.) The plaintiff-respondent had filed a suit for cancellation of the sale-deed on the ground that he is bhumidhar of Gata No.173 measuring 0.551 hectares and being very old he is dependent upon his nephews. The defendants-appellants are his real brother-in-law and are resident of District Gonda. In the year 1999, the wife of the plaintiff-respondent died and since he was very much mentally disturbed on account of death of his wife, the defendants-appellants on the pretext of providing him medical help, took him to an office and told him that they had prepared a deed of Will, so that after his death, the property may devolve upon his nephew. The plaintiff-respondent on the assurance given by the defendant-appellants put his thumb impression on the said document, but subsequently he came to know that the defendant-appellant has got the sale-deed executed in respect of his bhumidhari land. With the aforesaid allegations, the plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for cancellation of the sale-deed on the ground of fraud.

(3.) The defendants-appellants contested the suit and filed the written statement denying the allegations and stating that the plaintiff-respondent had executed the sale-deed knowing fully well that the property was being sold to the defendants-appellants, the sale consideration was also paid to the plaintiff-respondent before execution of the sale-deed. He on being fully satisfied put his thumb impression before the Sub-Registrar and was also duly identified by the witnesses. The Sub-Registrar also on being satisfied that the plaintiff-respondent had executed a sale-deed out of his free will, registered the document. Since then, the defendants-appellants have been in continuous and peaceful possession of the property.