- (1.) WHEN this second appeal was heard it appeared that the parties may settle the dispute by negotiated compromise. Since no compromise was arrived at I proceed to dispose of the appeal on its merit.
(2.) THIS second appeal arises out of suit filed by plaintiff-respondent for cancellation of gift deed dated 1- 8-1974 registered on 20-9-1974 with respect to the property detailed at the foot of the plaint partly situate in village Bilsoori and partly in village Derha, Pargana Sikandarabad, District Bulandshahr. In brief the plaint.allegations were that the defendant-appellants, Mst. Mallo, Mst. Narain and Mst. Kalawati are the three married daughters of plaintiff-respondent, Mst. Bakhtawari. The plaintiff is the widow for last 30 years. The defendant-appellant, Mst. Mallo on 30-7-1974 came to the plaintiff's house along with her husband and asked her to move an application for giving her entire land to all the three daughters equally after her death and for that purpose took her to Sikandarabad on 1-8-1974. At Sikandarabad Mst. Malloo and her husband Jaspal Singh, in collusion with the scribe obtained the plaintiff-respondent's thumb impressions on several papers on the pretext that those documents were required in order to give equal share to all the three daughters after her death. After sometime Mst. Mallo and Jaspal Singh went to plaintiff, village Bilsaori and asked plaintiff's husband's brother to give possession over the land alleging that the plaintiff had already gifted the entire land in her favour. The plaintiff further alleged that the attesting witnesses Chandra Pal and Vir Narain are not the residents of the plaintiff's village nor the plaintiff has any knowledge of them. The plaintiff further alleged that the gift-deed in question was not read over and explained to her and she was under the impression that she was putting her thumb impressions on the documents which shall give the property in question equally to all her three daughters after her death. The defendant-appellant Mst. Mallo filed written statement and denied the plaint-allegations. The defendant-appellant pleaded that she was looking after the plaintiff and, therefore, the plaintiff wanted to gift her entire property to her and for that purpose the plaintiff executed the gift-deed in question on her own free will. No fraud was ever played over the plaintiff for executing the documents in the defendant's favour. The gift deed is valid and effective. Apart from this other pleas were also taken.
(3.) THE learned Munsif-framed several issues and decided the material issues against the plaintiff. THE learned Munsif held that the gift-deed was not obtained by fraud as alleged in the plaint and the gift deed is valid. In view of the above finding the suit was dismissed. On appeal by the plaintiff, the Appellate Court allowed the appeal and decreed the suit as prayed for by the plaintiff-respondent.;