VARINDER KUMAR Vs. ONKAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal arises out of the concurrent finding of facts recorded by the Courts below. Appellant Varinder Kumar, as plaintiff filed a suit against Shri Onkar Singh, present respondent No. 1 as defendant No. 1 and Shri Rajinder Singh, present respondent No. 2 as defendant No. 2. A declaration was sought in the suit to the effect that vehicle bearing No. HPG -1546 is owned by the plaintiff and that the defendants have no right, title or interest in the same.

(2.) IT was the case of the plaintiff that the original owner Shri Jagdish Singh had entered into certain agreements with one Shri Rasail Singh and his two sons S/Shri Vijay Kumar and Vinod Kumar in terms of agreement dated 31.8.1981 (Ext. PW -9/A). It was also pleaded that the subsequent agreement between S/Shri Vijay Kumar and Vinod Kumar, sons of Shri Rasil Singh, selling the vehicle to defendant No. 1 Shri Onkar Singh in terms of agreement dated 13.4.1983 (Ext.PW -9/A/1), was bad in law. It is the further case of the plaintiff that the subsequent agreement dated 20.7.1983 (Ext.PW -5/A) entered into between defendant No. 1 and defendant No. 2, transferring the vehicle is also bad in law. It is the plaintiff 'sown case that Shri Rasil Singh sold the vehicle to him on 23.9.1983 for a consideration of Rs. 32,000. The plaintiff has admitted that defendant No. 1 was the temporary owner of the vehicle in question.

(3.) THE plaintiff 'ssuit was resisted by the defendants, inter alia on the grounds and more particularly the fact that the plaintiff himself had witnessed the agreement Ext.PW -5/A and, therefore, any agreement of sale/transfer in favour of the plaintiff is bad in law.