JAWAHAR LAL GUPTA, J. - (1.) ON April 2, 1955 Hari Chand sold the land in dispute. On December 23, 1964 the plaintiff-appellant filed a suit for possession. The appellant alleged that he was a minor at the time of the execution of the sale deed. The sale was not an act of good management and it was not for necessity. He, therefore, prayed for the passing of a decree for possession by annulment of sale. On April 28, 1973 the trial Court decreed the suit. On defendants' appeal, the lower appellate Court reversed the findings of the trial Court on the material issues and dismissed the suit. Hence this second appeal.
(2.) MR . H.S. Hooda, learned Counsel for the appellant, has contended that defendant Hari Chand could not have acted as the guardian of the plaintiff- appellant, as his mother was alive. Thus, the sale was void. It has been further contended that the sale was not an act of good management. The claim made on behalf of the appellant has been controverted by the counsel for the respondents.
(3.) A few facts, on which there is no dispute, may be noticed.;