RATESH KUMAR Vs. BASUDEV SINGH PATHANIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant -plaintiff Ratesh Kumar is minor. He filed civil suit through his mother, natural guardian and next friend Smt. Santosh Kumari, widow of Jagan Nath against respondent -defendant Basudev Singh Pathania for possession of this plot in dispute, which was decreed in his favour by decree and judgment dated 30th January, 1985 passed by Sub -Judge, 1st Class, Nurpur. But in the appeal preferred by Basudev Singh Pathania, the decree and judgment of the trial Court was set aside and the suit of Ratesh Kumar was dismissed by the District Judge by his decree and judgment dated 17th August, 1988. Hence, the present regular second appeal.

(2.) The case set up by Ratesh Kumar in his plaint was that the plot in dispute was ancestral property, which his father Jagan Nath had inherited from his father Brij Lal and grand -father Puran Chand and it could not be sold without legal necessity under the custom by which they were governed and in the alternative under the Hindu law. According to him, his father Jagan Nath was addicted to drinking and gambling and taking benefit of his bad habits Basudev Singh Pathania got the plot in dispute alienated in his favour vide registered sale deed dated 4th January, 1982 without paying the consideration amount of Rs. 5,000 mentioned therein, as such the sale being without legal necessity was illegal, void and not binding on him.

(3.) Basudev Singh Pathania resisted the suit denying the allegations made therein, in general. His specific stand was that the sale deed dated 4th January, 1482 was executed by Jagan Nath of his free will and after consultation with Santosh Kumari, the mother of Ratesh Kumar and after receipt of consideration amount of Rs 5,000. He also asserted that Jagan Nath had sold the plot in dispute for legal necessity as he was in need of money for "pushing his family and to cure himself from disease."