- (1.)Appellant Laxmi Pathak was defendant No. 1 before the trial Court and Paksh Khambra was defendant No. 2. Respondent No. 1 was plaintiff before the trial Court, who had filed a suit for declaration of registered sale deed dated 25/08/2003 to be null and void. Registered sale deed was executed by Paksh Khambra in favour of Smt Laxmi Pathak in respect of part of land bearing Khasra No. 398 and 411/1/2, measuring 0.137 acres out of total 10.99 acres situated in Village Barkheda Pathani. Prayer for grant of permanent injunction was also made against defendant Nos. 1 and 2.
(2.)As per the plaintiff, the company and Paksh Khambra entered into an agreement on 30/10/2000 to develop 10 acres of land. Plaintiff and defendant No.2 were to make equal investment for development of plots. However, defendant No.2 did not invest any money, therefore, scheme could not be launched. Later on, it was decided to sell small undeveloped farms. Defendant No.2 was also having knowledge of this fact. After selling some land, plaintiff was having possession of 7.77 acres of land. Plaintiff executed a power of attorney in favour of defendant No.2 on 10/07/2001. On basis of such power of attorney, defendant No.2 sold 0.2 to 6 acres of land to one Ram Lal Gautam on 31/08/2001. Only 3.22 acres of land was sold as farms and plaintiff was having remaining 7.77 acres of land. In October 2005, plaintiff learnt from Patwari that only 1.32 acres of land is in his name in revenue records and rest of the land has been sold. On gathering information, plaintiff learnt that defendant No.2 has sold the land by forging signature of Managing Director M.P. Padmanabhan. Land in question was sold by defendant No. 2 to defendant No.1 by registered sale deed dated 25/08/2003 measuring 0.137 acres which is equal to 6000 ft.? It was averred by the plaintiff that except power of attorney dated 10/07/2001 no other power of attorney was executed in favour of defendant No.2. Defendant No.2 had sold the land by forged power of attorney and Managing Director M.P. Padmanabhan has not signed on registered sale deed. No sale consideration was received by the plaintiff. On basis of aforesaid averment, plaintiff prayed for aforesaid reliefs in the civil suit.
(3.)Defendant No.1 remained ex-parte before the trial Court and had not filed any written statement. Defendant No.2 filed its written statement and stated that late M.P. Padmanabhan has given power of attorney to defendant No.2. On basis of said power of attorney land was sold to different persons. Consideration was also given to the plaintiff and receipts were taken. Plaintiff is trying to mislead the Court. It was further stated by him that M.P. Padmanabhan who had signed the plaint and affidavit had already died on the date of filing of plaint. Defendant No.2 has acted as per the power of attorney and sale deed is valid and legal document which creates an interest in favour of defendant No.1. On basis of such pleading, defendant prayed for dismissal of suit.