HARENDRAJEET SINGH BABBU Vs. GURUBUX DHANOYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE case of petitioner Harendrajeet Singh (Babbu) as stated in the petition is that he is an elected Member of the Legislative Assembly of M.P. and has transport business. His parents were settled at Chiraidongri, District Mandla, where they had timber business. In 1984 riots, father of petitioner was killed and thereafter he along with other family members shifted to Jabalpur, where he started the transport business. The petitioner was looking for a suitable building where he could live and open his office. Respondent Indrapal Singh is a property broker and he approached the petitioner and suggested him about a house of a family i.e. of Ratan Singh and complainants who had settled at Canada long back and intended to sell their house. Smt. Harjinder Kuar, (petitioner of M.Cr.C. No. 6828/04) assured him that she has been authorized to sell the house owned by three persons. The petitioner purchased the said property through Indrapal Singh. The petitioner being very much busy with his business asked Indrapal and Smt. Harjinder Kaur to handle the entire matter of sale. In due course Smt. Harjinder Kaur and Indrapal handed over the petitioner a duly executed registered sale deed and Smt. Harjinder Kaur got the house vacated and handed over the vacant possession thereof to the petitioner. The petitioner had no reason to doubt that the sale deed given to him by Smt. Harjinder Kaur and Indrapal is forged or fabricated. It was in December 2000 that the petitioner came to know about the same when complainant Gurubaksh intimated him that Smt. Harjinder Kaur had not been authorized by him for sale of the house. The petitioner offered to return that part of the property which belonged to respondents No. 1 and 2 on the condition that the amount paid by him be refunded to him proportionately.

(2.) THE case of Smt. Harjinder Kaur Chakal (petitioner No. M.Cr.C. No. 6828/02) is that in the complaint total allegations against her was that she had exceeded her limits as stated in the power of attorney of Ratan Singh. Ratan Singh has no grievance. The allegations made in the complaint that she identified the persons who impersonated the complainants is totally false and baseless as the petitioner has not put her signature as a witness and therefore, it cannot be said that she had identified the persons who impersonated the complainants. It is also the case of the petitioner Smt. Harjinder Kaur that on the basis of false facts, complainants have filed a civil suit before the Court of 6th Additional District Judge, Jabalpur for declaration, permanent injunction and possession which has been dismissed. I have heard Dr. Sardar Rajendra Singh learned senior counsel with Shri A. Singh, appearing for petitioner and Shri Hamid Khan learned counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2 in M.Cr.C. No. 6842/03 and Shri S.K. Verma, learned counsel for petitioner and Shri Hamid Khan counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2 in M.Cr.C. No. 6828/02; and perused the record.

(3.) A perusal of sale deed reveals that it was executed by Smt. Harjinder Kaur, Sardar Jeet Singh and Gurubaksh in favour of petitioner Harendrajeet Singh. The petitioner did not dispute that the consideration was paid by him to Smt. Harjinder Kaur. When the sellers were more than one, it was necessary for him to pay the consideration to all of them. From the evidence of Gurubaksh it is clear that on the date when the sale deed is alleged to have been executed, neither he, nor Jeet singh was in India. Both of them were at Canada. Apparently sale deed was not executed by the complainants and some persons by impersonation represented themselves as Jeet Singh and Gurubaksh Singh and executed the sale deed. The petitioner is also a beneficiary, he being the purchaser and therefore, it cannot be said at this stage that the sale deed was executed without his knowledge. The defence of the petitioner that he being occupied in his business asked the respondents Indrapal Singh and Smt. Harjinder Kaur to handle the entire matter of sale is to be proved by him during the trial.