HUSENSAHEB GAJBARSAHEB VAJIRNAIK Vs. HASANSAHEB SAYAD ABDUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiffs sued to recover by equitable partition as owners a one-third share in the suit property. They claimed that the defendant-respondent had conveyed to them by a registered sale deed dated November 16, 1924, his right to the extent of one-third in the inam villages mentioned in the deed for a consideration of Rs. 5000. The suit was filed in 1915. The defendant denied the plaintiffs claim in toto and averred that it was false and fraudulent; that the plaintiffs obtained the sale-deed sued on by misrepresentation and by taking advantage of his helplessness, illness, ignorance and want of wordly experience; that the defendant did not receive any amount from the plaintiffs for the sale- deed; that the plaintiffs fraudulently got a certain site at Belgaum inserted in the sale-deed for the purpose of getting it registered at Belgaum, though the site did not belong to the defendant; and that accordingly the deed was null and void and must be treated as unregistered.

(2.) The plaintiffs made all the tenants and occupants of the suit lands in the inam villages, numbering ninety-four persons, defendants in the suit with the result; that there has been very great delay before the suit could be heard. These defendants were eventually discharged) from the suit. The Judge found that the sale-deed sued on was not obtained from the defendant fraudulently and without consideration; but he held that the deed was invalid on the ground of improper registration and dismissed the plaintiff s, suit.

(3.) We think the case comes within the decision of the Privy Council in Biswanath Prasad V/s. Chundra Narayan Chowdhari [1921] 48 Cal. 509 following the decision in Harendra Lal Roy V/s. Hari Dasi Debi [1914] 41 Cal. 972 the Judge found that the property situate within the district of the, Sub-Registrar of Belgaum did not belong to either party : that it was inserted by the party with the knowledge that it did not belong to the defendant ; and that it was inserted for the purpose of giving the Sub-Registrar of Belgaum jurisdiction. That would be a fraud on the registration, and consequently there was no jurisdiction to entertain the document.