LAKSHMAN BALWANT KHISTI Vs. VASUDEO MOHONIRAJ PANDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question in this appeal is whether the plaintiff appellant is entitled to possession from defendant respondent 2.

(2.) In 1902 Ramrao and Shamrao were in difficulties and passed the sale deed of 22nd June 1902, in favour of defendant 1. That Sale deed is held by both the lower Courts to have been benami and possession retained by the vendors. On 6 August 1923, defendant respondent 1 passed a registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff appellant, under which the present suit is brought. The only issues in the lower Court, apart from whether the plaintiff proves his sale deed, were the benami nature of the transaction, whether possession had been with defendant 1, or with defendant 2 and in the latter case, whether the possession with defendant 2 was adverse to plaintiff and defendant 1.

(3.) The trial Court found that the plaintiff had proved his sale deed, but answered all the other questions in favour of defendant 2. The plaintiff's appeal failed in the District Court on the same grounds. He now appeals to this Court.