BAHADUR SINGH Vs. SIDDANATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendants are in first appeal u/s 96 of CP. Code against the judgment and decree dt. 16.11.81 passed in Civil Suit No. 25A/77 by Ilnd ADJ, Ujjain. By impugned decree, the suit filed by the plaintiff has been decreed. Facts of the case need mention to appreciate the grievance of the parties.

(2.) LAND in suit bearing No. 207/2, area 4 Bigha, No. 208/2 area 29 and 12 Bigha. Jumla 33 Bigha situated in village Jhumki, Tehsil Badnagar Distt. Ujjain was orginally held and recorded in the name of one Pyaresingh on his death, it fell equally in the hands of his legal representatives i.e. 2 sons, widow and daughters each getting 1 /7th share in the aforesaid land. Bhuresingh was one of Pyaresingh son who also got l/7th share in the said land on the death of his father Pyaresingh. Bhuresingh sold his 1 /7th share by registered deed of sale dt. 10.3.69 to plaintiff for a total sum of Rs. 8,000/- and delivered possession of the said portion. Plaintiff then got his name mutated in all revenue records and was in actual possession till 15.5.72 when he was dispossessed from the said suit land by legal representatives of Pyaresingh.

(3.) THE suit was resisted by some of the legal representatives of late Pyaresingh. In substance, the defence was that of denial. According to defendants who contested the suit, Bherusingh had no right, title and interest in selling the land, much less a portion of it. It was alleged that the entire suit land belonged to joint family in which all sons and daughters had share. It was alleged that Bherusingh was a drunkard, and he never used to be in sense so as to know him of what he was doing. It was urged that sale made by Bherusingh was without consideration, it was for no legal necessity, it had no valid legal sanction nor any authority. Broadly on these facts the suit was resisted.