Imran Ali vs Rakish Singh & Anr.

R. H. Zaidi, J.

This is a plaintiff''s second appeal arising out of the suit for cancellation of the sale deed dated 25994 and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 1082000 passed by the Court below.

Plaintiffappellant filed a suit for cancellation of the aforesaid sale deed. The suit was filed with pleadings that the sale deed in question was never executed. The defendant Nos. 1 and 2, who were friends to each other, have approached the plaintiff on 24984. It was stated that the land situated in village Dhakoli, measuring 11 bigha, 13 biswa and 2 biswansi, which was joint was proposed to be sold in favour of the defendant No. 1 for an amount of Rs. 50,000. It was pleaded that sale deed in question got executed fraudulently in the garb of execution of agreement to sell without paying sale consideration to the plaintiffappellant, the same was therefore, liable to be cancelled. The suit was contested by the defendantsrespondents denying the claim of the plaintiffappellant asserting that the sale deed was executed after receiving the valuable considerations in accordance with law and voluntarily, therefore, the sale deed in question was not liable to be cancelled. The trial Court on the basis of the pleading of the parties framed relevant issues. Parties produced evidence in support of their cases. The trial Court after going through the evidence on the record, recorded findings on the relevant issues in favour of the defendants and dismissed the suit by judgment and decree dated 1221999. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree the plaintiffappellant filed Civil Appeal No. 96 of 1999, Imran v. Rakesh Singh and another, before the first Appellate Court. After hearing the parties and perusing the material on the record the first Appellate Court affirmed the findings recorded by the trial Court and dismissed the appeal by its judgment and decree dated 1082000. Hence the present second appeal.

Learned Counsel for the appellant vehemently urged that the findings recorded by the Courts below are not based on the relevant evidence on the record and they are based on surmises and conjectures. It was also urged that the Courts below have misread and misinterpreted the evidence on the record and the Appellate Court also erred in dismissing the appeal and affirming the findings recorded by the trial Court.

I have considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the appellant.

The two Courts below have recorded concurrent findings, which are based on relevant evidence on the record, oral and documentary. I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the findings recorded by the Courts below. The appeal is concluded by concurrent findings of fact. No substantial question of law is involved in this case.

This appeal is, therefore, dismissed under Order XLI, Rule 11, CPC.