SHOBHARAM BUDHAJI BHAGAT Vs. PARBATABAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three appeals can be disposed of by a common judgment since they arise out of a common judgment delivered by the Additional district judge, Bhandara. The original defendants are the appellants.

(2.) The facts giving rise to the appeals are as follows Respondent No. 3 Vithoba instituted three suits against three purchasers of the plot No. 53, 54 and 55. The plaintiff purchased one acre of land from out of survey No. 83/3 from one Bhaskarrao Zinzarde by registered saledeed dated 6/5/1978. After the plaintiff purchased the said one acre of land, he applied to the revenue authority for conversion of the said agricultural land into nonagriculture. Twenty four plots were carved out of the said one acre of land. Similarly, defendant Nos. 2 and 3 i.e. respondent Nos. 1 and 2 also purchased one acre land each out of the same survey number. They had also applied for conversion of their lands into nonagriculture. Permission was granted. In the year 1991 there was, however, a dispute between respondent Nos. 1 and 2 on one hand and respondent No. 3 on the other hand. On 31/12/1981, the said dispute was resolved and respondent Nos. 1 and 2 executed a deed known as "consent deed" in favour of respondent No. 3 and they endorsed the ownership of respondent No. 3 over plot Nos. 53, 54 and 55. Inspite of such admission and endorsement on the part of respondent Nos. 1 and 2, respondent No. 1 sold the three plots to the three appellants on various dates. Respondent No. 3 i.e. the plaintiff submits that respondent No. 1 had no right to sell those plots which belonged to respondent No. 3. Hence, he filed suit for declaration that the saledeed executed in favour of the appellants in respect of these three plots be set aside and declared as void and respondent No. 3 be put in possession of those plots.

(3.) The appellant and respondent Nos. 1 and 2 filed joint written statement. They deny that the plaintiff has purchased one acre of land out of Kh. No. 83/3. They, however, admit that they had purchased the land from Bhaskarrao Zinzarde under the saledeed. They deny that there was any dispute between them and plaintiff/respondent No. 3 over the boundaries of the plots. They deny having executed a consentdeed. It is the contention of the respondent that respondent No. 1 's husband died on 12/4/1981 and she delivered of a child on 23/10/1981. While she was recuperating, respondent No. 3/plaintiff came to her house and asked her to sign the blank stamp papers and blank papers under the pretext that he wants to submit the information about death of her husband and birth of a child to the municipal council. On this pretext, she alleges that her signatures were obtained. She had never executed any consent deed.