MADHO RAM Vs. MAHABALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BHANWAR Singh, J. This appeal arises out of a judgment and decree dated 24-7-1979, passed by the then District Judge, Kheri. By virtue of the said judgment and decree, the learned District Judge al lowed the Civil Appeal No. 32 of 1979 filed by Mahabali, the plaintiff of an original suit No. 88of 1977 filed by him for cancellation of sale-deed executed by Smt. Jagdei.

(2.) THE brief facts giving rise to this appeal may be recapitulated as below: Mahabali, since deceased, filed original suit No. 88 of 1977 for cancella tion of the registered sale-deed dated 17-1-1977 executed by Smt. Jagdei in favour of the defendant-appellant, Madho Ram. THE said sale-deed was registered on 18-1-1977 and the plaintiff also pleaded for setting aside of the said registration. A short pedigree brought for by the plaintiff would reveal that one Neelkanth had two sons, namely, Raghubir and Jagan. Jagan had a son, Mohan who died leaving behind him Sml. Jagdei as his widow (the ex ecutant of the sale-deed in question ). Raghubir had two sons, namely, Gajodhar and Mahabali (plaintiff ). After the death of her husband, Sml. Jagdei became bhumidhar of two plots and Sirdar of one plot situated in village Banstali, Pargana and District Kheri. She had inherited the entire holding from her husband. Mahabali pleaded in her plaint that Smt. Jagdei was illiterate, inexperienced and a Pardanashin lady. At the time of executing the sale-deed, she was about 80-85 years of age. It was pleaded further by the plaintiff that the defendant, Madho Ram Verma being in collusion with Sheo Nandan Prasad and Banwari put up before the Sub-Registrar another lady who represented herself as Smt. Jagdei and got the sale-deed in question executed in his favour. As a matter of fact, Smt. Jagdei expired on 6-1-1977, i. e. 10 days before the date of the alleged execution of ihe sale-deed and, as such, the sale-deed was fictitious and col lusive. Further, the sale-deed being ex ecuted without prior permission of the District Collector was illegal and without authority. As a mailer of fact, the plaintiff who was a family member of Smt. Jagdei continued to be in possession of the entire agricultural holding and on the strength of his possession, he filed the sun for cancellation of the sale-deed.

(3.) WHETHER the plaintiff is not the legal representative of the deceased? if so. its effect?