DAYAMANTI DEVI @ DAIMANTI DEVI Vs. URMILA DEVI WIFE OF RAM EQWAL SINGH, P S PUNPUN, AND DISTRICT OF PATNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 01.02.2011 passed by the Ld. Additional District Judge 2nd Patna in Title Appeal No. 62 of 2009 whereby and whereunder the petition filed by the petitioner for adducing additional evidence has been rejected.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the respondents had sold a piece of land to the defendant-appellant-petitioner herein bearing Plot No. 1785, Tauzi No. 390 and Khata No. 140, admeasuring 1 katha 4 dhur, situated at Dhakanpura, P.S.-Phulwari, at present P.S.- Gardanibagh, District-Patna by a registered deed of sale dated 07.10.1996. The deed of sale was executed by the Respondents and registered at the registration office at Kolkata, whereafter, the name of the defendant-appellant-petitioner herein was mutated in the records and the petitioner herein had then constructed a house on the said land where she has started living with her family members. However, subsequently, it appears that the intention of the respondents became dishonest and a Title Suit bearing Title Suit No. 355 of 1998 was filed in the court of Subordinate Judge, 1st Patna. In the plaint of the said Title Suit, it has been alleged that though the sale consideration for the said land was agreed at a sum of Rs. 50,000/- and out of the said amount, a sum of Rs. 5,000/- was paid at the time of execution and registration of the deed of sale at Kolkata and rest amount of Rs. 45,000/- was to be paid at the time of Takazul Badlain (exchange of registration receipt of the deed of sale), however, the balance consideration money of Rs. 45,000/-was not paid by the petitioner herein. In the said plaint, it was also alleged that since the balance amount of Rs. 45,000/- was not paid to the respondents, the respondents, on the basis of original registration receipt, had withdrawn the original sale deed from the registration office, which is in the custody of the Respondent No. 1 herein and the aforesaid suit was filed for cancellation of the said sale deed wherein an alternative relief was sought for decreeing the suit for a sum of Rs. 45,000/-, being the balance consideration money, with interest thereon. The defendant-appellant-petitioner herein had appeared in the said suit and filed a written statement taking various pleas including the ground of non-maintainability of the suit, there being no cause of action for filing the suit, suit being barred by the principles of estoppel, waiver, acquiescence, suit being barred by limitation and also hit by the provisions contained in the Specific Relief Act, apart from the court fee paid being insufficient since the suit was for declaration of title as well as for setting aside the sale deed and recovery of possession. In the written statement, as far as the facts of the case are concerned, it was stated that the sale deed was executed in favour of the appellant-petitioner herein only after payment of full consideration money, whereafter title was conveyed to the appellant through the said sale deed, possession was handed over to the petitioner herein and the property was accordingly delivered to her. It has also been stated in the written statement that the plaintiff-respondent herein had in all 2 katha 4 dhur of land, out of which one katha 4 dhur of land was sold to the petitioner herein by the aforesaid registered sale deed dated 07.10.1996 and rest 1 katha of land was sold by the respondent to one Smt. Sharda Devi wife of Sri Surendra Prasad. It has also been stated that since the entire consideration money had already been paid by the petitioner, a sale deed with regard to the suit property was registered at Kolkata and the fact is that no part of the consideration money remains to be paid, however, since the scribe at Kolkata was known to the respondents, the respondents had assured that the sale deed would be obtained subsequently from the registration office and handed over to the petitioner.

(3.) It is the further case of the petitioner that an agreement for sale with regard to another piece of land was executed in between the husband of the petitioner herein and the original Respondent No. 2, admeasuring 1 katha 15 dhur, situated at Plot No. 482, Mohalla-Shiv Puri, Beur Road, Gardanibagh, District-Patna on which five shops were situated and the husband of the petitioner herein had paid a total sum of Rs. 1,45,000/- to the husband of the Respondent No. 1 vide bank draft dated 21.08.1996, however, the sale deed was neither executed nor registered and instead, the original Respondent No. 2 herein started demanding more money than the agreed price resulting in filing of a Title Suit bearing T.S. No. 273 of 1999 for specific performance of the contract, against the respondents herein, before the Ld. court of Sub-Judge First Patna. In this connection, it is submitted that the plot in question is only 1 katha, as such, the husband of the petitioner herein as also the petitioner herein had been pressuring the respondents to refund the proportionate price of 4 dhur, which they were evading and in order to avoid refund of the amount, the respondents dishonestly began blackmailing the husband of the petitioner and the petitioner with a view to misappropriate the aforesaid amount.