LAWS(P&H)-2015-11-391

DAYA CHAND Vs. BRAHMA AND ORS

Decided On November 16, 2015
DAYA CHAND Appellant
V/S
Brahma And Ors Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-plaintiff is in Regular Second Appeal against the concurrent findings of fact, whereby suit for declaration and injunction seeking setting aside the sale deed dated 06.12.2005 allegedly executed by defendant Nos.1 and 2 in favour of defendant No.3, has been dismissed.

(2.) Mr. R.S. Panghal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant submits, that Chhotu Ram was the owner of piece of land and on his death, the property had fallen to the share of the plaintiff and defendant Nos.1 and 2-respondents in equal share. However, vide sale deed dated 06.12.2005, the entire property has been sold, which is beyond the share. Since the property was situated in lal dora, therefore there was no proof of revenue record, except to suffer a oral statement. The respondentsdefendants have not been able to setup the plea of partition in respect of three houses and thus there is illegality and perversity.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and appraised the paper book.