GOPAL JHA Vs. BHUBNESHWAR JHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff is the appellant against judgment of affirmance. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 29.11.1988, passed by the learned 3rd. Additional District Judge, Saharsa, in title appeal No. 17 of 1981 Gopal Jha v. Bhubneshwar Jha and Ors., whereby he has dismissed the appeal preferred by the plaintiff, and has upheld the judgment and decree dated 27.8.1981, passed by the learned Munsif, Supaul, in title suit No. 1 of 1979 Gopal Jha v. Bhubneshwar Jha and Ors.. We shall go by the description of the parties occurring in the plaint.

(2.) According to the plaint, the plaintiff (the appellant) had purchased the lands in question by a registered deed of absolute sale dated 12.6.1929 (Exhibit-3), from Janak Lal Jha, the father of defendant No. 3 (respondent No. 3, Chandranand Jha). In view of the threat to his title, he instituted the suit for declaration that the registered deed of absolute sale dated 12.6.1929 (Exhibit-3) is a valid document and conveys right, title and interest to the plaintiff. Defendant No. 1 filed his written statement and stated therein that his father (Nasib Lal Jha) was the real owner of the lands in question who had purchased the same in the name of the said Janak Lal Jha, the vendor of the plaintiff. In other words, defendant No. 1 stated that he was the real owner of the land in question and Janak Lal Jha was the ostensible owner, i.e. his benamidar.

(3.) The trial Court framed the following issues for adjudication :-- (a) Is the suit as framed maintainable ? (b) Has the plaintiff got a valid cause of action to file the suit ? (c) Whether the suit is barred by law of limitation and principles of estoppel, waiver and acquiescence ? (d) Whether the suit is bad for the defect of parties ? (e) Whether the defendant third party (i.e., defendant No. 3 Chandra Nand Jha) had right, title, interest and possession over the suit lands to execute the, sale-deed in favour of the plaintiff ? or Whether the sale deed executed by the defendant No. 3 in favour of the plaintiff is a valid transaction and whether the same is binding on the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 ? (f) Whether the sale-deed executed by Boua Kamat in the name of Janak Lal was a Farzi (Benami) purchase of the father of defendant Nos. 1 and 2 and whether the father of defendant No. 3 was a "Farzidar" of the father of defendant No. 1 and whether the father of defendant No. 3 was the real owner or simply an ostensible owner of the suit land as described in Schedule-II of the plaint ? (g) Has the plaintiff got title and possession over the suit lands on the strength of the sale-deed executed by the defendant No. 3 in his favour ? (h) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the reliefs as claimed for and if so to what relief or reliefs ?