SHEIKH IBRAHIM Vs. SHEIKH REHMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred by the original defendant Nos.1 to 6 who has suffered a decree of possession in the suit filed by the respondent-sole. The plaintiff claims his ownership over the suit property on the basis of Hiba in his favour by his father on 11/06/2005. Thereafter, oral gift dtd. 11/06/2005 is reduced into writing on 12/06/2005. The father is arrayed as defendant in the suit. The father has supported the case of the plaintiff in his written statement. It is not the contention of defendant Nos.1 to 6, that the written statement was filed by his father under the influence of plaintiff. The learned Trial Court has accepted the case of oral gift i.e. Hiba by father defendant No.7 in favour of the plaintiff and has accordingly passed a decree for possession in favour of the plaintiff. The defendant Nos.1 to 6 challenged the said decree by filing first appeal bearing Regular Civil Appeal No.262/2019 which is also dismissed vide Judgment and Decree dtd. 28/03/2022. The present second appeal is preferred against these concurrent Judgments and Decrees.

(2.) Shri M.R. Joharapurkar, learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the evidence on record is insufficient to establish the case for transfer of property by the father defendant No.7 in favour of the plaintiff. The said contention is liable to be rejected. In view of the fact that the father is party to the suit and has supported the case of the plaintiff by filing his written statement. As stated above, it is not even the case of appellants i.e. defendant Nos.1 to 6 that the father has filed written statement not on his own accord or free will, but under the influence of the plaintiff.

(3.) In that view of the matter, the fact that the gift by father - defendant No.7 in favour of son, the plaintiff cannot be doubted.