ABDUL RAZAK CHAND Vs. MOHAMMAD SAYEED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal, the 3rd defendant in OS No.486 of 1983 on the file of the 3rd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, challenges the judgment and decree therein. The parties are referred to as arrayed in the suit.

(2.) The plaintiff/respondent filed the suit for declaration of title in respect of the suit schedule property. According to him, the 1st defendant was the absolute owner of the property. She being the sister of his mother made an oral gift of the suit property on 2-1-1981. Since the parties are Muslims, oral gift is permissible. He was put in possession and ever since the date of gift, he has been enjoying the property. It was further pleaded that the 1st defendant executed a registered settlement deed dated 2-6-1981 in favour of the 2nd defendant, who is her grand daughter, he said settlement deed, however, was revoked by the 1st defendant through another deed dated 24-8-1981. On the same day, she is alleged to have executed a sale deed in favour of the 3rd defendant for a consideration of Rs. 47,500.00. It is the case of the plaintiff that inasmuch as the property stood transferred in his favour on 2-1-1981 itself, the subsequent settlement deed in favour of the 2nd defendant on 2-6-1981 and the sale in favour of the 3rd defendant on 24-8-1981 are of no consequence in law. The plaintiff alleged that he is in possession of the property and he does not expect any threat to his possession. In that view of the matter, the relief of declaration simpliciter was claimed.

(3.) After the summons in the suit were served, the 1st and 2nd defendants filed a Memo, wherein it was admitted that the 1st defendant made an oral gift of the suit schedule property in favour of the plaintiff on 2-1-1981. It was also stated that the 3rd defendant misrepresented and pleaded fraud in bringing about the sale in his favour. The 1st and 2nd defendants disowned the settlement as well as the sale, Though the 3rd defendant was served, he did not enter appearance and accordingly was set ex parte.