MANDA PURUSHOTTAM ZATTE Vs. CHANDRAKUMAR PARASMALJI CHORDIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent No.1Chandrakumar Parasmalji Chordiya is the original plaintiff and he had filed Regular Civil Suit No.93 of 1995 claiming the reliefs as under :

(2.) The defendant No.1 neither did file the written statement nor did enter the witnessbox. The defendant No.2, who is the wife of the defendant No.1, opposed the claim and denied the agreement to sell as well as the execution of saledeed and payment of consideration. The defendant No.2 specifically denied that the suit property was delivered to the plaintiff at any point of time and asserted that she has been in continuous cultivating possession of the suit property. She has urged that the defendant No.1, who is her husband, was addicted to vices and gambling and he was indebted to the Society Wani Taluka Kharedi Vikri Samiti Ltd. for misappropriating the amount of the said Society. It is also the stand taken that the defendants have one son and two daughters and the property in question was the ancestral property in the hands of the defendant No.1, who was not competent to transfer it alone.

(3.) The plaintiff entered the witnessbox and examined himself, whereas the defendant No.2 entered the witnessbox and also examined DW 1-Mangal Arjun Bhagade, an attesting witness to the agreement/Isarchitthi dated 2-9-1994, and another witness DW 3-Anandrao Govindrao Matte, an employee in the said Society.