PUNAMCHAND AMARCHAND MARWARI Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN Civil Suit No. 266 of 1924 on the file of the Sub-Judge No. 2, Yeotmal, Udebhan son of Madhoji sued Mt. Tulja wife of Narayan, and Nenuram son of Jogidas Marwari, on a contract alleged to have been entered into with the plaintiff by defendant 1 for the sale of her two fields Survey Nos. 9 and 42 of mouza Kotamba. These fields were said to be inherited by the-woman on the death of her mother Mt. Mukti. She was to sell for Rs. 1,100 and was alleged to have executed a souda-chitti on 24th February 1924, having received Rs. 1,000, and agreeing to execute the sale deed within a month. She failed to do so. She was said to have executed a bogus sale-deed in defendant 2's favour on 12th April 1924, of the same fields. The plaintiff sued for specific performance of the contract of sale on payment of Rs. 100, the balance of the consideration.

(2.) FOR defendant 1 it was contended that on the death of her father Zingu, who owned the fields Survey Nos. 42 and 9, about 27 years ago his widows Deoki and Mukti enjoyed this land till their death. Deoki sold Survey No. 42 to Narayan and Tukaram 18 years ago and Mukti, i.e., defendant 1's mother, sold Survey No. 9 to Bhagoo Bhamti about 25 years ago. Defendant 1 was the sole heir of her father Zingu on the death of his widows and defendant 2 fraudulently got a sale deed from her on 12th April 1924, without giving her any writing about the agreement to give her Survey No. 9. One Punamchand who attested that sale deed undertook to fight out a litigation with defendant 2 and to give Survey No. 9 to defendant 1 and in order to do so he obtained thumb marks of defendant on blank papers. It was denied that defendant 1 ever entered into any contract of sale of the fields with the plaintiff or executed the souda-chitti, dated 24th February 1924 or received any consideration.

(3.) THE suit was tried on the following issues: