RAGHBIR SINGH Vs. ISHWAR AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff-appellant filed a suit for declaration, which was decreed by the Civil Judge (Jr.Divn.), Panipta vide judgment and decree dated 28.7.2007. In appeal, filed by defendant No.1, the said judgment and decree were set aside by the Additional District Judge, Panipat vide judgment and decree dated 7.3.2008 and the suit of the plaintiff was dismissed. Hence, the present appeal by the plaintiff.

(2.) Written statement was filed in joint by both the parties taking preliminary objection of suit not maintainable; plaintiff not coming to the court with clean hands. On merits, the relation between the plaintiff and defendant No.2 was alleged and execution of the sale deed dated 5.10.1999 was admitted, but then defendants justified a proper power of attorney so executed from the plaintiff in favour of defendant No.2, after which the impugned sale deed dated 5.10.1999 was so executed, it was a complete denial that defendant No.2 had ever played fraud of any kind of having been taken plaintiff and his wife in the office of Tehsildar on 25.8.1998 and then took away the thumb impression of the plaintiff and later on converted the same in the form of general power of attorney which later became the basis of the impugned sale deed. Power of attorney was spoken to have been correctly executed after which came the impugned sale deed." On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by the trial Court:- 1. Whether the impugned sale deed dated 5.10.1999 is liable to be declared illegal, null and void and not binding upon the rights of plaintiff OPP 2. Whether the plaintiff has no cause of action OPD 3. Whether the suit is not maintainable OPD 4. Relief.

(3.) After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the present appeal deserves to be dismissed. The appellant-plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration that he was owner in possession of the suit property. A bogus sale deed dated 5.10.1999 had been executed by defendant No.2 in favour of defendant No.1 on the basis of an illegal power of attorney dated 26.10.1998. The suit filed by the plaintiff was decreed by the trial Court. However, in appeal, the suit filed by the plaintiff was dismissed on the ground that simple suit for declaration without seeking relief of possession was not maintainable.