RAJVIR SINGH Vs. RANDHIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is plaintiff's second appeal assailing concurrent judgments, whereby his suit for cancellation of registered sale-deed dtd. 24/3/2004 has been dismissed and civil appeal arising therefrom has also failed.

(2.) The plaintiff and defendant, who are real brothers, were owners to the extent of 1/3rd share each in agricultural land covered by Gata No. 1231/1 measuring 0.6930 hectares situated at Village Sikandrabad Dehat, Pargana and Tehsil Sikandrabad, District Bulandshahr. Remaining 1/3rd share was that of third brother, namely, Jai Singh. When, on 1/8/2007, plaintiff felt need of Khatauni, on obtaining copy thereof, he came to know that his name was expunged from the records and in its place, the defendant's name was recorded. Certified copy of the sale-deed was applied for and obtained on 1/8/2007 itself, on perusal whereof the plaintiff came to know about execution of a sale-deed dtd. 24/3/2004. As regards the date, it is stated that on 24/3/2004, the plaintiff, on account of some personal work, had gone to Sikandrabad where he met his elder brother (defendant) alongwith Jogendra Singh and Veeru. The defendant offered the plaintiff with Coca-cola and having drunken the same, the plaintiff fell in the state of inebriation and tipsiness and his brain stopped working. He gained consciousness on the next day and did not remember anything about 24/3/2004. The sale-deed was alleged to have been executed as a result of deceit and alleging that the defendant did not pay sum of Rs.2,00,000.00 (rupees two lacs) as alleged sale consideration; sale-deed was got executed in the state of plaintiff being under intoxication; it was not as per his free will; witness Veeru is related to the defendant and the other witness too being under influence of the defendant, all had colluded; plaintiff being an issueless person, had executed a registered Will dtd. 16/12/2003 in favour of defendant's sons and, therefore, there was no occasion for executing the sale-deed.

(3.) The written statement admitted the shares as described in the plaint, but the sale-deed was defended as having been duly executed without any coercion and after making payment of Rs.2,00,000.00 (rupees two lacs) as sale consideration. The incident of 24/3/2004 as described by the plaintiff, particularly the plea of intoxication etc., was denied, and it was alleged that the plaintiff had taken loan towards business of truck and he being in need of money, sold the property to the defendant, discharged his financial liability and also got him medically treated.