MAHESH SINGH Vs. SEWARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree dated 8th March, 97, passed by Shri A.K. Jain, Third Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Bhind, in Civil Appeal No. 31 A/96, arising out of the judgment and decree dated 26.11.1990, passed by Civil Judge Class -II, Mehgaon. district Bhind, in Civil Suit No. 31 A of 86. .

(2.) BRIEFLY narrated the facts are that the respondents -plaintiffs 1 to 4 filed the suit for declaration of Bhumi Swami rights and delivery -of possession and also for cancellation of sale -deed dated 20.7.1974, in respect of the disputed lands It was contended that the sale -deed was executed by one of the plaintiffs named Sewaram in favour of Hukumsingh. It. -was contended that the Sewaram was in lad and the document was got executed by adopting the procedure under Section 38 of Indian Registration, Act. The document was sent to the Sub Registrar, Gwalior who held an enquiry on 1.8.1974 and thereafter sent it to the office or Sub -Registrar, Mehgaon where the document was registered on 28.8.1974.

(3.) SHRI A.K. Shrivastava. learned counsel for the appellants contended that in this case, service was not proper, and the Court -below was not justified' in proceeding ex parte. It was contended that in this case the counsel pleaded no instructions and therefore notices ought to have been issued. Reliance was placed on AIR 1993 SC 1182 (Tahil Ram Issardas Sadarangani and others v. Ramchand Issardas Sadarangani and another) and (1998) 2 SCC 206 (Malkiat Singh and another v. Joginder Singh and another). In Tahil Ram's case' (supra) (AIR 1993 SC 1182), the Apex Court held as under: