ATAR SINGH Vs. MAYAWATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) R. N. Ray, J. The plaintiff as appel lant has preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree passed in Civil Appeal No. 114 of 1978 dated 2-9-82 reversing the judgment and decree of the learned Trial Court.

(2.) THE plaintiff filed the suit being numbered as 549 of 1975 which was filed in the Court of Munsif, Haveli, Meerut. It is the plaintiff's case that the plaintiff is an illeterate, simple and old man aged about 60 years and he is hard of hearing and his eye sight is also very weak. He is the owner and in possession of the disputed agricultural land. It was contended that amount of Rs. 3000/- and Rs. 4500/- was due to Bank and Co-operative Societies and some amount was also due which was taken from some other villagers. THErefore, he was badly needed Rs. 1000/- to liquidate the said debts. THE plaintiff asked the husband of the defendants to advance a loan of Rs. 10, 000/-to him. THE husband of the defendants agreed to pay, on condition that the plain tiff to execute mortgage deed with 1% per mensem interest after depositing 20 times annual rental in Tahsil. THE plaintiff agreed to the proposal and thereafter the plaintiff and the husband of the respondents ex ecuted the mortgage deed and plaintiff deposited 20 times of rent for converting his right into bhumidhari right and after two days to that, he went to the office of Sub-Registrar with the husbands of the defen dants with the witnesses, who were the per sons of the husbands of the defendants. THE plaintiff and the witnesses, when the sale deed was being written, had been asked to sit in some distant place on the pretext that there was crowed at the place of scribe and after the document was written, he was asked to put his thumb impressions. THE plaintiff, who had confidence in the hus bands of the defendants and was in need of money, put his thumb impressions at many places. As per instruction of the husband of the defendant No. 1 he deposed that he had executed the document and he to receive Rs. 10000/ -. THE Sub-Registrar had inquired from him only these two things and he had answered in affirmative. Later on he was told that the document was a sale-deed for his lands for Rs. 20. 000/- executed by him in favour of the defendants. THE plaintiff took the copy of the sale-deed and got the con tents read over and then came to know that the defendant and the witnesses managed to fet the sale-deed executed in respect of the isputed land in favour of the defendants, though there was talk a simple mortgage for a sum of Rs. 10, 000/- in respect of the dis puted land.

(3.) THE parties led both oral and documentary evidences. After considering the materials on record, the trial Court held that the plaintiff wanted to make a simple mortgage deed against the advance of Rs. 10, 000/- only which he badly needed to square off his loan to the Bank and the Co-operative Society and some other per sons and the plaintiff never understood the contents of the deed and as such he was pleased to decree the suit by cancelling the disputed deed. Against the judgment and decreed which went in favour of the plain tiff, the defendants-appellants preferred ap peal THE learned Court below reversed the judgment after holding that it was the sale-deed simpliciter and the plaintiff parted the possession in favour of the defendants after execution of the sale-deed and it was further held by the learned Court below that the plaintiff received Rs. 20, 000/- in two stages for the disputed land and executed the sale deed and the plaintiffs allegations were all manufactured allegations. Against the judg ment of reversal, the present appeal has been preferred.