KARAM SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. CHETU AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This regular second appeal has been filed by the plaintiffappellants against the judgment and decree dated 5.10.1988 passed by the lower appellate Court whereby their appeal against the judgment and decree dated 10.6.1985 passed by the learned trial court, was rejected, thereby dismissing the suit filed by them for declaration to the effect that judgment and decree dated 27.11.1982 in Suit No.926 of 24.11.1982 was illegal, void and did not affect their rights and was not binding on them.

(2.) Briefly, the facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy involved, as available on record, may be noticed. Karam Singh and Khem Singh plaintiff-appellants alleged an agreement of sale dated 18.11.1981 in their favour executed by Magh Singh in respect of the suit property on behalf of Chetu defendantrespondent as his attorney. Chetu executed a power of attorney in favour of Magh Singh on 5.11.1981 and under the said authority Magh Singh executed an agreement of sale in favour of the appellants and received Rs. 1,55,000/- as earnest money. Chetu was abducted by respondents No.2 to 4 who took him to an unknown destination in a car. Since then he had been kept in illegal confinement by the said respondents. In order to frustrate the agreement in favour of the appellants, respondent Nos. 2 to 4 obtained a collusive decree in their favour suffered by respondent No.1. The said decree was passed by Sub Judge, Ist Class, Rajpura on 27.11.1982 which was sought to be challenged in the suit filed by the appellants on the ground that the same was illegal, void and collusive and it did not affect their rights in the suit land. It was alleged that there was already a temporary injunction restraining respondent No.1 from alienating the suit land and the said decree had been suffered by him in violation of the injunction order. The suit was contested by the respondents on the ground that Magh Singh was never appointed as attorney by Chetu. It was further pleaded that even if there was any such power of attorney, the same was obtained by Magh Singh through fraud and under pressure from Chetu. It was alleged that the said attorney was cancelled when Chetu came to know about the same. It was rather stated by Chetu in the court that Magh Singh had obtained his thumb impression under pressure on some blank papers and registers.

(3.) On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the trial court:-