L.N. Mittal, J. - (1.) PLAINTIFF Labh Chand having failed in both the courts below has filed the instant second appeal.
(2.) APPELLANT -Plaintiff filed suit against Defendant -Respondent Parmeshwari Bai who is wife of Plaintiff -Appellant. Consent decree dated 27.03.1995 was passed in favour of Defendant herein against the Plaintiff herein regarding suit land measuring 48 Kanals declaring the Defendant herein to be owner in possession thereof. Plaintiff in the instant suit has challenged the said consent decree by pleading that family settlement mentioned in Civil Suit No. 234 of 1995 in which decree dated 27.03.1995 was passed, never took place. The family settlement was never acted upon. Defendant started residing separately from the Plaintiff in the year 1994 due to differences between the parties. This compromise take place in March 1995. According to compromise, the Plaintiff agreed to give limited right of maintenance in the suit land to the Defendant. However, Plaintiff's signatures were obtained on several blank papers by the Defendant and her parental family members. Now Plaintiff came to know about the impugned consent decree transferring ownership of the suit land in favour of Defendant herein. Accordingly, Plaintiff filed suit seeking declaration that he continues to be owner in possession of the suit land and that judgment and decree dated 27.03.1995 declaring Defendant herein to be owner in possession of the suit land are result of fraud and misrepresentation and not binding on the Plaintiff and are liable to be set aside along with consequent mutation and revenue entries. Plaintiff also sought permanent injunction restraining the Defendant from alienating the land in any manner. Defendant contested the suit. However, relationship between the parties was admitted. Defendant alleged that three daughters were born out of the wedlock between the parties. The Plaintiff started maltreating the Defendant as there was no surviving male child. Then family settlement took place, according to which suit land was given to the Defendant. Pursuant to family settlement, impugned consent decree dated 27.03.1995 was passed declaring the Defendant herein to be owner in possession of the suit land. The said decree is legal and valid and was voluntarily suffered by the Plaintiff. On the other hand, in the year 1998, the Plaintiff has brought one Parkash Kaur as his wife, although marriage between the parties is still subsisting. Various other pleas were also raised.
(3.) LEARNED Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sirsa vide judgment and decree dated 10.10.2008 dismissed the Plaintiff's suit. First appeal preferred by Plaintiff has been dismissed by learned District Judge, Sirsa vide judgment and decree dated 10.03.2010. Feeling aggrieved, Plaintiff has filed the instant second appeal.;