BHAGWAN SINGH Vs. SHYAMLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is defendant's appeal, aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 7.12.1995 in Civil Appeal No.11 -A/1994 by First Additional District Judge, Raisen reversing the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Judge Class II, Raisen in Civil Suit No.20 -A/1979 dated 25.2.1992. The trial Court dismissed the suit of plaintiff -respondent.

(2.) THIS appeal was admitted on 13.2.1996 on the following substantial questions of law:

(3.) SHRI A.D. Deoras, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1 supported the judgment and decree passed by the Court below and submitted that the appellate Court after appreciating the evidence in the matter has rightly reversed the finding of the trial Court. There is overwhelming evidence that the intention of the plaintiff was to mortgage the property for his necessities. Previously he was disposing the property for a consideration of Rs.30,000/ - to Dr. S.K. Sharma (PW2) but on persuasion of respondent No.2 who happens to be the cousin of the plaintiff, property was mortgaged with the appellant for a loan amount of Rs.12,000/ - only. The property on the date of the transaction was having substantial value and there was no question of sale it for Rs.12,000/ -. In fact it was a loan transaction and for the security of the loan, property was mortgaged but by playing fraud on the plaintiff; the appellant and respondent No.2 collusively got the sale -deed executed and the oral evidence in respect of true nature of the transaction in respect of which document was executed is admissible. Reliance is placed to the judgment of the apex Court in Gangabai v. Chhabubai [AIR 1982 SC 20] and R. Janakiraman v. State [AIR 2006 SC 1106], and submitted that this appeal may be dismissed.