SITARAM Vs. MANSHA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (to be called as 'code' only ).

(2.) MANSHA Ram (R-l ). on 30-9-77 filed a suit for declaration that sale-deed dated 27-6-73 was sham and fictitious, for confirmation of his possession and for permanent injunction. Admittedly the appellant is a moneylender. A sale-deed was executed by Mansha Ram (R-l) for 1. 5 acre of land out of Khasra No. 207, area 3. 404 hectare (8. 48 acres) for a consideration of Rs. 3000/ -. Name of appellant was mutated in revenue papers. Mansha Ram (R-l) has claimed that he was in dire necessity of money to pay loans of other money-lenders and for purchase of a bullock. On his approach to the appellant he demanded interest at the rate of 25% per annum and directed him to execute a sale-deed as a collateral security for the loan. He has repaid Rs. 2000a in Jeth 1976. In Vaisakh 1977 when he went to repay the remaining amount of Rs. 1000/- the appellant demanded Rs. 11000/ -. According to him the value of suit land was Rs. 25000/- and there was no question of selling the same for just Rs. 3000/ -. On the other hand the appellant has claimed that he had actually purchase the land and got possession of the same.

(3.) THE case of respondents did not find favour with the Trial Court. The suit was dismissed with the holding that it was not a loan transaction. Neither Rs. 2000/- was repaid nor the sale-deed was sham and fictitious. However, learned First Appellate Court did not agree with the Trial Court and held that sale-deed was sham and fictitious and was written merely as a collateral security for the loan and ordered Mansha Ram (R-1) to repay Rs. 1000/- with interest @ 1% per month. A decree for declaration that sale-deed did not create any title in the appellant, with a permanent injunction against interference in his possession was also granted in favour of Mansha Ram (R-1 ).