HARISH CHANDRA PANDEY Vs. RAM VISHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff Smt. Paragiya, widow of Shyam Lal has filed a suit for permanent injunction against defendant Ram Vishal with averment that disputed house was constructed and owned by her husband Shyam Lal, and after the death of Shyam Lal 10 years ago, she became owner in possession of the said house. In Aug., 1994 the defendant asked the plaintiff that said house belong to him. He asked the plaintiff to remove his possession from that house then cause of action arose. Plaintiff Smt. Paragiya had filed a suit against the defendant for seeking relief that she be declared owner of the disputed house. During proceedings of the suit, original plaintiff Paragiya died and she was substituted by one Harish Chandra Pandey, son of Har Prasad Pandey, who is the present appellant.

(2.) In Original Suit defendant filed a written statement denying the plaintiff's case and pleaded that disputed house was initially owned by Shyam Lal who had performed her first marriage with Indi, and thereafter kept Smt. Paragiya, who is not the legally wedded wife of Shyam Lal. So Smt. Paragiya cannot inherit his property and has no right to institute the suit for said property. Shyam Lal had executed registered sale deed dated 12.10.1983 by which he sold disputed house to the plaintiff for Rs. 15000.00 and gave him the possession of this house. Shyam Lal had constructed a temple along with some small rooms in which he resided till his death. From very beginning the suit is barred by Sec. 34 of the Specific Relief Act and is liable to be dismissed.

(3.) In replication filed by the plaintiff in original suit, it was pleaded that Shyam Lal had not executed any sale deed regarding disputed house and alleged sale-deed dated 12.10.1983 does not contain thumb impression of Shyam Lal. Therefore, it is illegal and void.