DURGI DEVI Vs. JASWANT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant Regular Second Appeal filed under Sec. 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, is directed against the judgment and decree dated 27.5.2008, passed by learned District Judge, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P., in Civil Appeal No.114 of 2006, affirming the judgment and decree dated 30.8.2006, passed by learned Civil Judge(Junior Division) Court No.1, Mandi, H.P. in Civil Suit No.176 of 1999, whereby suit for declaration with consequential relief of injunction and in the alternative for possession filed by the appellants-plaintiffs has been dismissed.

(2.) Briefly stated facts, as emerged from the record are that appellants (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiffs) filed suit for declaration with consequential relief of injunction and in the alternative for possession against the respondents (hereinafter referred to as the defendants) averring therein that plaintiff No.1 is an old, illiterate simpleton lady of 80 years and plaintiff No. 2 is her daughter, who has become saint ( "Sanyasini ") for the last 20 years. Plaintiffs further averred in the plaint that defendant No.1 is her sister's son. Plaint further reveals that one Sundaru Devi filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction with regard to land comprised in khasra No.625, measuring 0-5-16 bighas, situated in village Tilli, illaqua Pachhiat, Tehsil Sadar, District Mandi, H.P against the plaintiffs. Since, plaintiff No.1 was an old, illiterate lady and plaintiff No.2 being "Sanyasini " were unable to defend the said case personally and as such, requested defendant No.1 to watch their interest in the aforesaid suit. Plaintiff further alleged that defendant No.1, who was having an eye over the property of the plaintiffs, asked them to execute the General Power of Attorney in his favour. The plaintiff No.1 while reposing confidence in defendant No.1 and executed General Power of Attorney in favour of defendant No.1 on 2.7.1993 at Mandi, whereas plaintiff No.2 executed similar General Power of Attorney on 30.8.1993 at Palampur, District Kangra authorizing defendant No.1 to defend the case titled "Sundaru Devi Vs. Durgi Devi and others .

(3.) Plaintiffs further averred that they were ignorant of the fact that by way of execution of General Power of Attorney, defendant No.1 can alienate and dispose of other landed property, which were not the subject matter of the suit. Plaintiffs further claimed that they remained under the impression and belief that defendant No.1 has been only authorised to defend them in case titled "Sundaru Devi Vs. Durgi Devi and others . Thereafter, defendant No.1 in connivance with the petition writer manipulated the General Power of Attorney authorizing himself for disposal of the entire property of the plaintiffs. Plaintiff also furnished detail of properties owned and possessed by them at village Tilli, Pargana Pachhiat, Tehsil Sadar, District Mandi, HP, details whereof are available in the plaint(hereinafter referred to as the suit land).