CHHAJJU Vs. RAGHBIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present regular second appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned lower appellate Court vide which judgment and decree passed by the learned Sub Judge Ist Class, Palwal, was reversed and suit filed by the plaintiff respondent was ordered to be decreed.

(2.) THE plaintiff had instituted a suit for declaration to the effect that the alleged three mortgages for Rs. 5,500/- (Rs. five thousand and five hundred only) each alleged to have been executed in favour of defendant on or about 5.12.1977 are void and not binding against the rights and title of the plaintiff in the suit lands described in para No. 1 of the plaint. It was further claimed that plaintiff was the lawful owner with cultivating possession of his half share of agricultural land. As a consequential relief, a decree for injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in the possession it was claimed that in case the defendants succeeds in obtaining possession on the basis of alleged mortgage deeds the relief of possession be granted in the alternative in favour of the plaintiff respondent. The plaintiff-respondent claimed that he was owner in possession of half share of agricultural land measuring 74 kanals 8 marlas situated in the revenue estate of village Sondhad, described in para 1 of the plaint. It was claimed that the plaintiff before December, 1877 as well as during and after the said month was suffering from insanity and madness and, therefore, was incapable to make any valid contract during the said period. It was further claimed that plaintiff took undue advantage of the mental deficiency and asked the wife of the plaintiff to send him to the office of the Tehsildar so as to get him admitted in some Govt. hospital for treatment at the Govt. expenses. It was claimed that in view of the aforesaid fraudulent misrepresentation to the wife of the plaintiff she was induced to send the plaintiff to the office of Tehsildar with the defendant with the objective of obtaining recommendation letter from the Tehsildar for the admission of the plaintiff in some Govt. mental hospital. It was further claimed that on the basis of the said fraudulent misrepresentation the plaintiff respondent was taken to the Tehsil premises on 5.12.1977 and three mortgage deeds under challenge were got executed in favour of defendant without consideration. Thus, it was claimed that these mortgage deeds were void ab initio and non est. It was also claimed that suit land is ancestral property in the hands of the plaintiff and it could not be alienated without legal necessity. It was pleaded that plaintiff was governed by the agricultural custom in the matter of alienation of agricultural land as according to custom no one could sell agricultural land without legal necessity. The plaintiff after having recovered from the mental illness filed the suit.

(3.) THE learned trial Court decided issue Nos. 1, 2 and 6 together against the plaintiff and consequently dismissed the suit by holding that the plaintiff- respondent had failed to prove his mental ailment and furthermore the execution of the mortgage-deed was duly proved on the record. The learned trial Court also took into account the law that presumption of truth is attached to the official record and, therefore, the registration of document could not be said to be bad and consequently dismissed the suit. On appeal being filed by the appellant, the Addl. District Judge, Faridabad reversed the finding recorded by the learned trial Court on issue Nos. 1, 2 and 6 and decreed the suit. The finding on issue Nos. 1, 2 and 6 as recorded by the learned lower appellate Court reads as under :-