BRIJ RAJ Vs. RAM SARUP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This litigation has its origin in a deed of sale executed on the 30 of September, 1914, by one Sita Ram and his mother Mt. Parbati in favour of Haji Muhammad Ghafoor Bakhsh, by which the executants purported to convey certain shares in kasba Ujhani and mauza Mahona for a sum of Rs. 13,110 in order to satisfy certain debts and to meet personal expenses. It was represented in the document that the houses in which the vendors were living had been advertised for sale and had to be saved. It was stated moreover in the deed that Sita Ram was the only heir of Mt. Parbati and that he and she were competent to sell the property. Sita Ram further stated that he had an only son, Deo Dat who had given his consent to the sale. This was a false statement for it appears that he had no less than eight sons.

(2.) In the deed of sale the details of consideration are set out. It appears that there were a number of debts owing which the vendee undertook to pay, and amongst these was a decretal debt for Rs. 1,750 owing to one Kanhaiya Lal.

(3.) Ghafoor Bakhsh had some trouble in obtaining mutation on the basis of this document. It appears that the other sons of Sita Ram intervened and made trouble and all this resulted in criminal proceedings taken both by Ghafoor Bakhsh and by the sons of Sita Ram. Eventually in the early part of March 1915 (about 15th. March), Ghafoor Bakhsh got possession and mutation.