SURJIT KAUR Vs. GURDEV SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having failed in both the courts below, the plaintiff has filed this regular second appeal. The case of the plaintiff-appellant is that her father Gurdial Singh, respondent No. 3, was the owner of the house in dispute. About 16-17 years ago, he gave the said house to the appellant and since then she is owner in possession thereof. Her father respondent No. 3 had suffered a decree in the year 1993 in a suit for declaration filed by the appellant and the decree was passed by learned Senior Sub Judge, Bhatinda on 16.4.83.

(2.) It is alleged that as respondent No. 3 was a liquor addict, respondents No. 1 and 2 manipulated some writing from him when he was not in his senses and they also started living with him, on 18.5.83, respondents No. 1 and 2 filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining respondent No. 3 from alienating the disputed property to any other person on the basis of the said writing/agreement to sell. The suit was dismissed. They filed another suit on the basis of said agreement to sell. Again by administering liquor to respondent No. 3 and with the connivance of the local police, the sale deed was got executed and possession of the house was taken forcibly. It is further the contention of the appellant that respondents No. 1 and 2 further transferred the said property without any right to respondent No. 4 during the pendency of the suit. On these allegation, it was prayed that a decree for possession of the house and permanent injunction restraining respondents No. 1, 2, and 4 from alienating the same be passed.

(3.) The suit was contested by respondents No. 2 and 4. The suit, ultimately, was dismissed and the appeal filed against the same was also dismissed.