SATTI LAL Vs. RAJ KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri U.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Santosh Kumar Mishra with Sri Ashwani Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent.

(2.) This is an appeal under Sec. 100 of Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'C.P.C.') filed by the appellants against the judgment and decree dated 10.8.2001 passed by learned District Judge, Unnao in Civil Appeal No.22 of 2001 whereby the appeal filed by the appellants against the judgment and decree dated 30.1.2001 passed by learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Purwa, Unnao, was dismissed.

(3.) Succinctly stated the facts of the case as born out from the appeal are that Sri Ayodhya @ Chhotkauna filed Original Suit No.109 of 1984 (Ayodhya alias Chhotkauna Vs. Satti Lal and another) against the appellants on the allegations that he was a bhoomidhar-owner-in possession of Plot No.229 situated in Village Kutubpur, Pargana Bihar, Tehsil Purwa, District Unnao; the defendants/appellants are sons of his real brother-in-law, who are residing at a distance of twenty miles from the village of the plaintiff; the defendants seldom used to come to the house of the plaintiff. The plaintiff came to know that the defendants have filed a mutation case on the basis of forged sale deed alleged to have been executed by him on 23.9.1981; the mutation proceedings are forged; no notice was served upon the plaintiff. The plaintiff had not executed the sale deed and had not received any consideration; the sale deed is forged and fictitious.