CHHADAMILAL MALTHURAM PURI Vs. SAILANI PURI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a second appeal filed by the plaintiff, whose suit was dismissed by both the courts below. This judgment shall also govern the decision of the second appeal No. 222 of 1954 (Mst. Betibai and Ors. v. Sailana Puri and Anr. ). The plaintiffs in both the cases were co-sharers, while the first respondent Sailanipuri in both the cases was the lambardar of the patti, in which the plaintiffs held the share. The land revenue payable by the plaintiff Chhadamilal was Rs. 211/4/ -. The plaintiff's suit was for setting aside the sale on the ground, that the revenue sale had been brought about by the first respondent fraudulently, in collusion with the second respondent Kalloopuri, who is his nephew. Regarding the fraud, the pleas raised were to the effect that although the plaintiffs had paid Rs. 211/4/- as the land revenue due from him to the lambardar Sailanipuri, as also an additional amount of Rs. 158-6-0 in advance, as the lambardar was in need of money, the latter allowed the patti to be auctioned in a revenue sale and, in collusion with his nephew Kalloopuri, got it purchased in the said auction.

(2.) THE defence was a denial of the receipt of the said amount of Rs. 369-10-0 in spite of the receipt executed by Sailanipuri on 16-12-1948, Ex. P. 1. The other allegations were formally denied and the additional pleas raised in the suit were that the suit as framed was not tenable and that the court-fee paid was not proper. It was also averred that there was no conspiracy between the defendants.

(3.) THE learned trial Judge was of the opinion, that although the story, as put forward by the first defendant and his witnesses, was a false and fabricated one, relating to the payment of Rs. 369-10-0, all the same the fraud was not proved. The learned appellate Judge negatived the allegations of fraud on the finding that no conspiracy between the first and the second defendant was proved.