E ADINARAYANA PATRA Vs. RAMAHARI PATRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful plaintiff has preferred this appeal in forma pauperis. The suit was for partition of the disputed properties into two equal shares between the plaintiff and defendant No. 3 and for recovery of possession and mesne profits.

(2.) The suit properties belonged to the joint family consisting of the plaintiff, his father E. Surya Patra and brother E. Appana Patra. On a reference to arbitration for partition of the family properties, the Arbitrators passed an award allotting l/3rd share to each of the three male members of the family. The suit properties measuring 4.80 acres were allotted to E. Appalamma, the step mother of E. Surya Patra for enjoyment during her lifetime in lieu of right of maintenance on condition that she would have no power of alienation and that after her death the properties would revert to E. Surya Patra and his heirs. A decree in terms of the award was passed by the Court on 7-4-25 vide Ext. 1. Sometime after the award, the plaintiff, his father and brother apprehended that Appalamma would transfer the entire suit properties to her son-in-law (defendant No. 4). In order to save the properties the plaintiff, his father and brother executed three nominal sale deeds in repect thereof in favour of defendants 1 and 2 on 22-1-36, 18-2-36 and 11-5-36 -- vide Exts. A, B and C. The plaintiffs brother Appanna died in 1943 leaving behind him his son Dukhishyam who is defendant No. 3 in the suit. On 3-3-58, defendant No. 2 sold away his half share in the suit properties to defendant No. 4 by the sale deed Ext, D. Appalamma died on 29-7-63. After her death, defendant No. 1 executed a sale deed in favour of defendant No. 5 in respect of 0.09 acre out of the suit lands. The plaintiff's contention is that the sale deeds -- Exts. A, B and C -- were sham and nominal transactions and that on the death of Appalamma the suit properties reverted to him and his nephew Dukhishyam (defendant No. 3). Upon these allegations, he filed the suit for the aforesaid reliefs.

(3.) Defendants 1 and 4 filed a joint written statement contending that the plaintiff, his brother and father had a vested interest in the suit properties and they conveyed good title under the sala deeds -- Exts. A. B and C --for valuable consideration.