MAYA DEVI Vs. DES RAJ AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree, dated 01.04.2005, passed by the learned District Judge, Una, H.P. in Civil Appeal No. 44 of 2003, titled as Des Raj v. Smt. Shakuntla Devi.

(2.) KEY facts necessary for the adjudication of this Regular Second Appeal are that the plaintiff/respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as "the plaintiff" for the sake of convenience) had instituted a suit bearing Civil Suit No. 145 of 1991 against Sh. Madan Lal Vashisht, predecessor -in -interest of the defendants/appellants (hereinafter referred to as "the defendants" for the sake of convenience) as well as against Smt. Ram Piari and Sh. Tirath Ram for declaration. The case of the plaintiff was that he was resident of village Ajouli and was owner in possession of suit land measuring 0 -14 -42 Hcts., as detailed in head -note of the plaint. Defendant Madan Lal (since deceased) was also resident of village Ajouli. He was a Medical Practitioner. The plaintiff was an agriculturist and in order to supplement his income by earning and doing work abroad, intended to go abroad during the year 1979 and came in contact with defendant No. 1. He persuaded the plaintiff to execute a General Power of Attorney in his favour to manage the property of the plaintiff in his absence. The plaintiff executed General Power of Attorney on 29.05.1979 in favour of defendant No. 1 Madan Lal Vashisht. Plaintiff could not go abroad due to lack of money and also informed the defendant No. 1 and asked him not to do any act on the basis of general power of attorney. Defendant No. 1 did not do any act on the basis of power of attorney and the power of attorney remained only a paper transaction. The plaintiff came to know that the defendant No. 1 Madan Lal had sold the land on the basis of General Power of Attorney for consideration of Rs. 1,50,000/ - in favour of defendant No. 2 vide sale deed, dated 17.11.1989 and mutation has also been sanctioned on 26.03.1990. The suit land was abutting the Ajauli -Nangal road and was highly valuable from the business point of view and the rate of the land was Rs. 15,000/ - per marla. The actual price of the land was more than Rs. 4 lac at that time. Thereafter, the plaintiff revoked the General Power of Attorney vide registered deed, dated 13.06.1991 and defendant No. 1 was duly notified through registered notice. According to the plaintiff, the sale deed was without his consent and authority.

(3.) THE defendants No. 2 and 3 also contested the suit. According to them, the suit land was sold by the defendant No. 1 as General Power of Attorney of the plaintiff to the defendant No. 2 vide sale deed, dated 17.11.1989 for a consideration of Rs. 1,50,000/ -.