VISHNUAVTAR AND ORS. Vs. MAWASI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is second appeal by the plaintiffs in a suit for cancellation of sale deed, possession of agricultural lands and recovery of mesne profits.

(2.) THE relevant facts giving rise to this appeal are like this : The dispute relates to khasra Nos. 307, 310, 320, 331 & 332 measuring 12 bighas 12 his was situate at village Bagad Rajput, tehsil Alwar. The plaintiff's case was that during their minority the disputed property was being managed by their mother Smt. Triveni Devi (mother of Laxman Awtar) and Smt. Narbadadevi (mother of plaintiff Vishunavtar and Krishna Awtar). On 9 -6 -58 Smt. Triveni Devi and Smt. Narbada Devi appointed Shiv Lal and Chunni Lal as their Aam -mukhtiyars for the management of the disputed property. According to the Aam mukhtiyarnama dated 9 -6 -58 both the Aam mukhtiyars were authorised to act jointly . On 7 -8 -59 one of the Aam mukthtiyars, namely, Shiv Lal sold away the disputed lands to the defendants Nos. 1 to 8 for a sum of Rs. 1500/ - vide registered sale deed Ex. A/2. The said Aam mukhtiyar also delivered possession of the suit lands is to the vendees. The plaintiffs also alleged that out of the sale -price, a sum of Rs. 500 was paid and for the balance a promissory -note was executed by the vendees. The plaintiffs further alleged chat the sale was void for want of authority & legal necessity and inadequate consideration. The plaintiffs therefore prayed that the sale deed dated 7 -8 -59 Ex. A/2 be cancelled. They also prayed for recovery of possession and claimed mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 300 per annum. The suit was resisted by the vendees -defendants Nos. 1 to 8 According to the defendants, the disputed lands formed part of Biswedari lands of which the plaintiffs were the mortgagees and since the biswedari was abolished by the Rajasthan Zamindari and Biswedari Abolition Act, 1959, the plaintiffs had no right, title or interest in the disputed lands. The paid Act admittedly came into force on 1 -11 -59. The defendants admitted that Shiv Lal and Chunni Lal were Aam -mukhtiyars of Smt. Triveni Devi and Smt. Narbada Devi. They also admitted that Shiv Lal had sold the disputed lands to them vide sale deed dated 7 -8 -59. They, however, denied that the sale was illegal or void for want of authority and legal necessity or adequate consideration. They further pleaded that they were in possession of the disputed lands for more than 15 years and as such they were khatedar tenants. They also denied having received possession of the suit lands by virtue of the impugned sale -deed Some technical pleas were also raised by the defendants, namely, that the State of Rajasthan was a necessary party to the suit and that the suit was triable by a revenue court under the Rajasthan Tenancy Act and not by a civil court. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the trial court:

(3.) WHETHER the defendants Nos. 1 to 8 had acquired tenancy rights over the suit fields and what is its bearing on the present suit ?