Ram Shanker and Others vs Kailash Nath and Others

Pankaj Mithal, J.—The dispute in these two appeals is regarding araji No. 378 area 0 Bigha 1 Biswa 17 Biswansi situate in village Khalilabad, District Basti.

Ram Shanker filed Original Suit No. 264 of 1987 for cancellation of the sale deed dated 7.12.1987 and titama (corrigendum deed) dated 8.1.1985 whereby the aforesaid land was transferred for a sale consideration of Rs. 11,000/- by his brother Gokaran in favour of Kailash Nath and Asha Devi.

Ram Shanker claimed himself to be the sole owner and as such contended that his brother Gokaran had no right to transfer the said land and the aforesaid sale deed is illegal, null and void.

Kailash Nath and Ors. filed O.S. No. 373 of 1987 for permanent injunction against Ram Shanker in respect of the above land on the basis of the sale deed referred to above contending that Gokaran was the rightful owner.

The suit of Ram Shanker was decreed by the court of first instance and that of Kailash Nath and Ors. was dismissed but in appeal the judgment, order and decrees of the court below have been reversed. In the result the suit of Ram Shanker stands dismissed and that of Kailash Nath and others decreed.

Having heard learned Counsel for the Appellants and the learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No. 1, 2/1 to 2/3, the following question of law arises:

Whether the lower appellate court is justified in holding Gokaran to be the owner of araji No. 378 and entitle to sell it when he himself had admitted that he had nothing to do with the said plot of land and what he intended to sell to Kailash Nath was the land of arajai No. 387 only?

Since the parties are represented, instead of admitting the appeal, it is considered proper to decide the appeal finally at the admission stage.

Let the parties exchange necessary affidavits.

Issue notice to the other Respondents ie. 3/1 to 3/8, 4, 5 and 6.

List after six weeks.

Till the next date of listing, parties are directed to maintain status quo with regard to nature and possession of the disputed land and further not to create any third party rights over it.