SAI BABA Vs. MOHAMMAD KAREEM KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Civil Revision Petition No.2166 of 2002 is filed against the Order dated 22-4-2002 passed by the Court of II Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad dismissing E.A.No.92 of 2002 in E.A.No.65 of 2002 in E.P.No.93 of 1999 in O.S.No.657 of 1998, while Civil Revision Petition No.3423 of 2002 is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the Order dated 20-3-2002 made in E.P.No.93 of 1999 in O.S.No.657 of 1998 on the file of the Court of II Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

(2.) The petitioner in Civil Revision Petition No.3423 of 2002 is the respondent in Civil Revision Petition No.2166 of 2002, while the 1st respondent in Civil Revision Petition No.3423 of 2002 is the petitioner in Civil Revision Petition No.2166 of 2002. I will hereinafter refer the parties as arrayed in Civil Revision Petition No.3423 of 2002 for the sake of convenience.

(3.) The petitioner is the 5th defendant in O.S.No.657 of 1998, which was filed by the 1st respondent against his mother, the 2nd respondent (1st defendant) and three sisters (defendants 2 to 4) for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 16-8-1996 in respect of Mulgi bearing No.4-1-380 ad measuring 24 square yards situate at Palace Talkies, Abids, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as 'suit mulgi') and also to direct the 1st defendant i.e. 2nd respondent herein, to receive the balance sale consideration of Rs.20,000/- and to register the sale deed in his favour by delivering title, possession and attornment of tenancy of the 5th defendant - petitioner hereinof the suit mulgi and also to cancel the gift deed dated 22-11-1996 executed by the 1st defendant in favour of defendants 2 to 4 by declaring it as null and void. The 1st respondent alleged in the said suit that his mother entered into an agreement of sale dated 16-8-1996 agreeing to sell the said property for a sum of Rs.2.00 lakhs and he has paid an amount of Rs.1,80,000/- as earnest money-cum-part sale consideration to the 2nd respondent herein. The 2nd respondent received the said amount. But, the 2nd respondent instead of executing the sale deed in his favour, she has gifted the said property to her daughters - defendants 2 to 4 - in the said suit, vide Gift Deed No.3209/96, dated 22-11-1996. Hence, the plaintiff sought for the consequential relief of cancellation of the said registered gift deed.