LAXMI BRICKS UJRAI Vs. DARIYAB SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A suit being Original Suit No.1064 of 1993 was filed by the plaintiff-appellant for the relief of cancellation of a sale deed dated 27.6.1984. Alongwith the prayer for cancellation of the sale deed, a permanent injunction for restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's possession over the suit property and also for putting the plaintiff into possession if he was found to be out of it was also prayed for.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff was that while the plaintiff was the son of one Shiv Charan, he was adopted by his uncle namely Natthi Lal and while he was still a minor, his date of birth being 17.3.1973 as per his High School certificate and 15.9.1974 as per the school leaving certificate, the properties which belonged to him in plot no.686 were illegally sold off by Shiv Charan after giving out that he was the plaintiff's guardian. Further case taken up in the plaint was that after Natthi Lal had died, the plaintiff was looked after by the daughters of Natthi Lal and Shiv Charan had absolutely no concern with either him or his property. The suit was filed on 14.9.1994 within three years of the plaintiff reaching 18 years of age as per the date of birth given in the High School certificate.

(3.) The plaintiff had stated that the property contained in plot no.686 was around 27 bighas and 17 biswas and half of this property belonged to the plaintiff. Even though only 5 and half bigha was sold by the sale deed which was under challenge, it was averred in the sale deed that Shiv Charan who was selling his property was also selling a portion of the property of the plaintiff. The property was sold by Shiv Charan vide sale deed dated 27.6.1984 to the defendant no.1 namely Laxmi Bricks through its Proprietor the defendant no.2-Brij Mohan. Since, the defendant nos.1 and 2 had sold the property further to defendant nos.3 and 4 on 3.5.2001, they were also arrayed as defendants in the suit. The defendant nos.1 and 2 contested the suit and stated that the plaintiff though was the adopted son of Natthi Lal, after the death of Natthi Lal, was under the guardianship of his de-facto father Shiv Charan and since the properties were joint, the natural father Shiv Charan had the authority to sell the land and, therefore, no fault could be found by the plaintiff in the sale deed.