JAWALA SUNDER AHIR Vs. PUTTANLAL PHOOLCHAND PODDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is plaintiffs revision under Section 115 of the Civil procedure Code from the order dated 10-8-1983 of the Second Additional Judge to the court of the District Judge, Gwalior in Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 21/82, reversing the temporary injunction order dated 18-7-1982 of the Civil Judge (Class. II), Bhander restraining the defendants in C. S. No. 31-A/82 (filed on 13-5-1982) from interfering with the plaintiff's possession over certain agricultural holdings (area 3. 546 hectares) situate at village Berachh, tehsil Bhander, district Gwalior.

(2.) THE plaintiff's case is that on 12-8-1971 he mortgaged the suit lands (owned by him) with defendant No. 1 Puttan Lal and his brother Haridas (defendant No. 2) for Rs. 3,000/- and executed a registered deed in token of the mortgage. He however, continued to be in possession of the lands. In February 1982 the plaintiff came to know that the defendants 1 and 2 had in fact got a sale-deed executed for a stated consideration of Rs. 5,000/- and some-how manipulated mutation of the suit lands in their names on the basis of this registered instrument dated 12-8-1971 and then on 19-1-1982 they executed one registered sale-deed in favour of defendants No. 4 and 5 for Rs. 16,000/- in respect of 2. 733 hectares of the suit lands and another registered sale-deed in favour of defendant No. 3 for Rs. 6,000/- in respect of O. 733 hectare of the suit lands. Thus, the defendants now seek to dispossess the plaintiff of the suit lands. The plaintiff seeks a declaration of his title to the suit lands and for cancellation of the so called Sale deed dated 12-8-1971 after declaring it to be an instrument executed for securing a loan, and for a permanent injunction for restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs possession.

(3.) THE plaintiff filed an application for temporary injunction on the aforementioned averments along with the plaint. The trial Court passed a detailed order on 13-5-1982 and issued an ex-parte temporary injunction against the defendants. The defendants filed written statements and written replies to the application for a temporary injunction. The parties filed documents.