SANTOSH KAR Vs. MAHIMA RANJAN KAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal arises from the judgment and decree dated 6th February 2019 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kandi, Murshidabad, in Title Appeal No. 51 of 2012 affirming the judgment and decree dated 2nd May 2012 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kandi, Murshidabad, in Title Suit No. 96 of 2010, whereby and whereunder the suit for declaration that the deed is void as the executant never executed the same was decreed.

(2.) Admittedly, the plaintiff/respondent is the owner of the property and alleged that he never divested his right, title and interest in respect of the suit property in favour of the defendant/appellant by executing purported deed of gift. The specific case made out in the plaint is that though the name of the plaintiff/respondent is shown in the purported deed but somebody impersonating the plaintiff/respondent executed the same and, therefore, a declaration is required that the said deed is void.

(3.) The defendant/appellant appeared and contested the suit denying all the averments made in the plaint. It is a specific case of the defendant/appellant that the plaintiff/respondent executed a deed of gift vide no. 5322 in the year 1975 in favour of the defendant/appellant by giving the property described in schedule 'ka' to the plaint. Pursuant to the said deed of gift, the LR Record of Right is corrected and the entry recorded therein would evince that the defendant/appellant is the owner of the disputed property.