RADHEY LAL Vs. LAXMI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil second appeal has been preferred by the appellants/plaintiffs against the judgement and decree dtd. 19/11/2008 passed by learned Additional District Judge No.1, Bayana, District Bharatpur (for brevity-'the learned appellate court') in CAR No.34/1999 whereby, while dismissing the appeal, the judgement and decree dtd. 27/10/1999 passed by learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Bayana, Bharatpur (for brevity-'the learned trial court) dismissing the civil suit no.129/1999 filed for cancellation of sale deed and permanent injunction, has been upheld.

(2.) The relevant facts in brief are that Shri Radhey Lal, the predecessor in interest of the appellants (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff') filed a suit against Smt. Laxmi Devi, the predecessor in interest of the respondents no.1/1 to 1/4 (hereinafter referred to as 'the defendant no.1') and the respondents no.2 and 3 (hereinafter referred to as 'the defendants no.2 and 3) stating therein that he has executed a registered will dtd. 28/5/1973 of his entire movable and immovable properties including the subject house as described in para 3 of the plaint, in favour of his five sons. It was averred that the defendant no.2, his son, brought him from Bayana to Bharatpur on 3/12/1980 to get his eyes examined where he got some documents signed from him which were kept by him. It was stated that on 8/12/1980, he came to know that the defendant no.2 has, fraudulently taking undue advantage of his old age, got executed a registered sale deed of the subject house in favour of the defendant no.1, his wife, for a sale consideration of Rs.5,000.00which was never received by him. Therefore, the decree for cancellation of sale deed and permanent injunction was prayed for. The defendants no.1 and 2 in their joint written statement submitted that the will was cancelled on 3/12/1980. It was averred that on the insistence of the plaintiff himself, the defendant no.1 agreed to purchase the subject property for which she paid the sale consideration of Rs.5,000.00 from her own fund as she was employed as the Headmistress in the Government job.

(3.) On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the learned trial court framed four issues including reliefs.