PAL SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. VINOD AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant-appellants are in second appeal before this Court.

(2.) The plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration claiming to be owners in possession in respect to the suit property and seeking a declaration that sale-deed dated 9.12.2004 and consequent mutation No.4304 in favour of the defendants was illegal, null and void. A consequential relief for permanent injunction was also sought restraining the defendants from interfering in the peaceful possession of the plaintiffs over the suit property.

(3.) It was pleaded that the plaintiffs had purchased the suit property from defendant No.1 through registered sale-deed, dated 30.6.2003, and the requisite entry in the revenue record had also been incorporated in favour of the plaintiffs in pursuance thereto. It was asserted that defendant No.1 had transferred the portion of the suit property as marked by letters 'ABEF' shown as red in the site plan in favour of defendant No.2 by executing a subsequent sale-deed on 9.12.2004 and defendant No.1 had been left with no right, title or interest in the suit property. It was further pleaded that defendant No.2 was, in fact, a tenant of the plaintiffs in another shop adjoining the suit property and as such, had full knowledge that defendant No.1 had already sold the suit property to the plaintiffs on 30.6.2003. On the basis of a subsequent sale-deed dated 9.12.2004, defendant No.2 was threatening to dispossess the plaintiffs from the suit property and, in fact, a criminal complaint in this regard had also been lodged by the plaintiffs against the defendants. It is under such factual backdrop that the suit had been instituted.