AMAR NATH & OTHERS Vs. CHAUDHARY AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the appellants, who were plaintiffs in the trial Court and have lost in two Courts below.

(2.) The case of the plaintiffs, as pleaded, was that they had filed a suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent prohibitory injunction against the respondents-defendants on the pleading that the first defendant Shri Chaudhary was owner in possession of the suit land measuring 69 bighas as detailed in the plaint. The plaintiffs are sons of Shri Chaudhary, who was arrayed as a defendant by them. The plaintiffs claimed that they constituted a Joint Hindu Family. The land was ancestral in the hands of first defendant Shri Chaudhary being coparcenary property. They pleaded that their father had sold a portion of the suit land in favour of the remaining respondents through two sale deeds which were not binding on their interest as they were without legal necessity. It was further case of the plaintiff that their father was vice of drinking and womanizing and that he was controlled by one Smt.Banti. This suit was resisted by the defendants including Shri Chaudhary.

(3.) On the pleadings, the learned trial Court settled eleven issues. The primary and most important issues being (i) Whether the suit land was ancestral and the plaintiffs and the first defendant constituted a Joint Hindu Family , (ii) Whether the first defendant had sold the land without legal necessity , (iii) Whether the first defendant was under the influence of one Smt.Banti who had compelled him to dispose of the property and (iv) Whether the vendees had knowledge that the land was coparcenary property