TARABAI VITHAL SARAK Vs. KAMAL VITHAL SARAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TARABAI is the wife of Vithal who was original owner of land bearing gat no.110 area admeasuring 35 gunthas on 28.6.1979. Ostensible mortgage was created in favour of one Vetala Daji for a period of five years. The document recites that the possession was handed over. On 10th December, 1980 Vithal sold the suit land to Kamal, defendant No.1, herein. The said deed also recites that the possession was handed over to Kamal. On 8th February, 1983 Vetala assigned his rights in favour of Tarabai the present appellant. The said document also recites that possession was handed over.

(2.) IN the month of July, 1988 the appellant filed suit for perpetual injunction. In the suit, the appellant stated that the lands are originally owned by Vithal and her relations with Vithal are not cordial. She claims that after the transaction between her and Vetala, she was put in possession and she is cultivating the suit land. The suit was resisted by the defendants stating therein that Vetala was money lender and the document between Vetala and Vithal dated 28.6.1979 was nominal. Under the said document, possession was not given to said Vetala. The defendants further stated that the lands are sold to defendant no.1 by registered deed and she be put in possession. The defendants stated that the relations between the appellant and her husband are cordial. Even though he had two wives, the appellant has stayed along with Vithal. The appellant in connivance with her husband Vithal are trying to deprive them of the suit land.

(3.) THE evidence on record adduced by the respondents is satisfactory and from the basis of said evidence the court can arrive at the said conclusion that after the sale deed dated 10.12.1988 defendant no.1 was put in possession. There is recital in the document and on the basis of said document he may be continued in possession of the suit land as owner. From the perusal of the record, it is clear that possession of the suit land was not handed over to Vetala on 28th June, 1979 nor Vetala has handed over possession to the present appellant by deed dated 8th February, 1983. Thus the appellant could not have been put in possession of the suit land in 1983.