HARI DUTT Vs. KAMAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by defendant No. 1 against the judgment, decree dated 5.10.1998 passed by District Judge, Una in Civil Appeal No. 22 of 1993 decreeing the suit of respondent No. 1 after setting aside the judgment and decree dated 28.12.1992 passed by Sub -Judge 1st Class, Una in Civil Suit No. 264 of 1986.

(2.) THE facts in brief are that respondent No. 1 had filed suit against the appellant and proforma respondent N. 2 for declaration that sale deed dated 1.10.1986 Ex. D -1 executed by proforma respondent No. 2 in favour of appellant on the basis of power of attorney dated 3.9.1986 Ex. DW 5/A is wrong, illegal, void being result of fraud, mis -representation and respondent No. 1 is owner in possession of the suit land with further prayer for issuance of permanent prohibitory injunction against appellant and proforma respondent No. 2 not to interfere on the suit land, alienate and transfer the suit land in any manner.

(3.) THE suit was contested by appellant and proforma respondent No. 2 and they took objections of maintainability, locus -standi and valuation. It was pleaded that appellant is owner in possession of the suit land on the basis of sale deed. The appellant and proforma respondent denied any conspiracy, as alleged by respondent No. 1. It was pleaded that respondent No. 1 had executed a general power of attorney in favour of proforma respondent No. 2 to transfer the land of respondent No. 1 by way of sale, gift etc. The proforma respondent No. 2 on the basis of general power of attorney had executed sale deed dated 1.10.1986 in favour of appellant for sale consideration which was paid by proforma respondent No. 2 to respondent No. 1. The appellant after the registration of the sale deed is owner in possession of the suit land. The cancellation and revocation of general power of attorney on 6.10.1986 has no effect on the right of the appellant on the suit land. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed: