NARAYAN KESHAV JOSHI Vs. DIGAMBAR KESHAV JOSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Second Appeal is preferred by the original defendant against the decree for possession and injunction passed in favour of his brother Digambar, the respondent.

(2.) THE respondent has filed a suit for possession of house properties enumerated in para 4 of the plaint and for injunction restraining the appellant from collecting rent and taxes in respect of the said property. The trial Court decreed the suit on 26.2.1991. It held that the suit property was purchased by the respondent on 15.5.1942, though at the relevant time he was a minor. It found that the sale deed dated 15.5.1942 at exh. 28 is purchased by Digambar in his own name. There is no dispute about this fact. There is also no dispute about the fact that the same property was originally transferred under registered sale deed by the father of the appellant and the respondent in the name of one Ganu from whom the respondent purchased it in the year 1942 under exh. 28.

(3.) AS regards the question whether the property was a joint family property, the lower appellate Court ; has come to the conclusion that there is no evidence whatsoever on record to show that the father of the parties had sufficient funds to repurchase the suit property in the name of the respondent who was then a minor. The lower appellate Court has adverted to the fact that there is no evidence brought on record to show that the appellant of his father contribute any amount towards the purchase of the property and that there was any property which belongs to a joint Hindu family. It is clear that what the lower appellate Court meant was that the appellant has not proved the existence of a nucleus from the funds of which this property is said to have been purchased.