MUDIT VERMA Vs. RAM KUMAR & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition is filed by the petitioner-defendant challenging the order dated 28.05.2012 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Lucknow and order dated 07.08.2015 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No.1, Lucknow. By the first order, learned Additional Civil Judge has rejected an application filed by the petitioner-defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 of the C.P.C. and by the second order, learned Additional District Judge has affirmed the order of learned Additional Civil Judge and rejected the civil revision also.

(2.) Facts of the case, as set up by the petitioner-defendant, are that a sale deed was executed on 08.01.1974 by late Sri Bechu, with regard to agricultural plots no. 234 and 249 situated at Village-Vijaipur, P.S, Gomtinagar, Pargana, Tehsil and District Lucknow, in favour of petitioner-defendant and late Sri Servendra Shekhar Singh, his brother. On the basis of the said sale deed, by order dated 31.08.1974 passed by the revenue authorities, names of petitioner-defendant and his brother were duly mutated in the revenue records. In the year 1984 the State Government acquired the said two plots along with other surrounding lands and in the year 1985 an award was also made. Sri Bechu expired on 10.05.1999. No objection to the sale deed or mutation was ever made by Sri Bechu till he expired. After about 12 years of his death and after 37 years of execution of the sale deed, his sons, namely Sri Ram Kumar and Om Prakash, respondents-plaintiffs filed a Regular Suit No.112 of 2011, claiming that the said sale deed executed on 08.01.1974 is a forged document and does not contain the thumb impression of their late father. They prayed for: (a) cancellation of the sale deed dated 08.01.1974 and (b): "a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendant, his heirs, agent and any person claiming rights through him, for interfering the peaceful possession of the plaintiffs and from dispossessing the plaintiffs from the land in suit". The plaint was filed on 27.01.2011. Relevant paragraphs of the plaint, for our purposes, are as follows:-

(3.) The petitioner-defendant filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC on 11.02.2011. In his application petitioner-defendant took objection with regard to the suit being barred by limitation, as it was instituted after more than 37 years of the execution of the registered sale deed executed on 08.01.1974. Another objection taken was that the suit is abuse of process of law and same is a frivolous and vexatious litigation and hence, the plaint ought be rejected outright. Petitioner-defendant also filed an application under Order 10 CPC read with Order 19 CPC on 27.04.2012. In the said application, petitioner-defendant also alleged that respondents-plaintiffs have concealed government notification with regard to acquisition of the land and court is bound to take judicial notice thereof. In the application, petitioner-defendant stated that notifications under Section 4 read with Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act and Section 6, were issued on 04.12.1984 and an award was made on 25.02.1987. He submits that thereafter in the Khatauni, the possession of Ujarioan Aavasiya Yojana, i.e., the name of the scheme for which the land was acquired, is noted and these facts have been concealed by the respondents-plaintiffs. He prayed that the respondents-plaintiffs be summoned for getting their statement recorded under Order 10 CPC.