PARDEEP Vs. NARESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present appeal, challenge has been made at the instance of appellant/plaintiff to the judgments and decrees dtd. 11/10/2012 and 21/9/2016 passed by the courts below, whereby, a suit for declaration, filed at his instance, challenging the sale deed dtd. 10/2/2006 executed by respondent No.1 in favour of respondent No.2 as well as the sale deed dtd. 25/5/2006, executed by respondent No.2 in favour of respondents No.3 and 4, has been dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the appellant-plaintiff filed a suit for declaration qua the land in question claiming ownership and possession in his favour, based on the averments that by virtue of consent decree dtd. 2/10/1996 passed in Civil Suit titled as'Pardeep Vs. Naresh', the same was transferred in his name. It was further pleaded that despite the ownership and possession of land in favour of appellant-plaintiff, respondent No.1-defendant No.1 (herein after referred to as defendant No.1) illegally executed sale deed dtd. 10/2/2006 in favour of defendant No.2, who in turn wrongly transferred the same in favour of defendants No.3 and 4 through sale deed dtd. 25/5/2006.

(3.) Upon notice, defendant No.1 chose not to appear and was thus, proceeded against ex-parte. Defendant No.2 as well as defendants No.3 and 4 filed their separate sets of written statement, disputing the claim set up by the appellant-plaintiff. In short, it was pleaded that the answering defendants were bonafide purchasers for valuable consideration having purchased the suit property after looking into the record pertaining to the ownership in the name of defendant No.1 and thus, he being the ostensible owner and they were even handed over possession of the suit property as well. Based on the respective pleadings, the trial court vide its order dtd. 20/12/2006, formulated the following issues:-