- (1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the appellants. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that late Shri Gopal filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction in respect of disputed property on the basis of registered gift deed dated 23.1.1978 in his favour executed by his father Mangoo. The said suit was contested by the present appellants on the ground that Rudi and Sedi daughters of Mangoo sold the said property through registered sale deed dated 17.10.1989. The learned trial court decreed the suit of Gopal that he is Khatedar of the land in dispute. Being aggrieved of the same, first appeal was preferred before the Revenue Appellate Authority and thereafter second appeal was preferred before the Revenue Board but both were dismissed. Thereafter the appellants filed writ petition before the Single Bench, which has also been dismissed. Hence the appellants have preferred this intra court appeal.
(2.) SUBMISSION of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the appellants are bona fide purchasers as they purchased the property in dispute through registered sale deed dated 17.10.1989 from Rudi and Sedi daughter of Mangoo. Therefore, without challenging the sale deed, the suit filed by Gopal, could not have been decreed.
(3.) WE have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellants in the light of the reasons assigned by the learned Single Bench for dismissal of the writ petition filed by the petitioner/appellant. We have also examined the reasons assigned by all the three revenue courts for decreeing the suit of Gopal. Admittedly, the registered gift deed was executed way back on 23.1.1978 stating therein that Gopal was adopted by Mangoo and Mangoo was happy with his services. The possession of the property was also given through registered gift deed. One of the facts mentioned in the various orders, is that one of the daughters of Mangoo filed a suit much before execution of the sale deed wherein Mangoo had accepted the execution of registered gift deed in favour of Gopal and another daughter of Mangoo had also accepted the execution of registered gift deed in his favour on 23.1.1978. All the courts below have recorded the concurrent finding that Smt. Rudi and Smt. Sedi, both had full knowledge about execution of registered gift deed by their father Mangoo in favour of his adopted son Gopal. So far as execution of sale deed in favour of defendant/appellant in the year 1989 is concerned, the same was void ab initio and ineffective against the appellant Gopal. All these facts and reasons have been taken into consideration by all the courts below and all the questions involved in the present case relate to question of facts and there is concurrent finding of facts by all the four courts below, including Single Bench, in favour of the respondents. We are satisfied that reasons assigned by the learned Single Judge for dismissal of the writ petition are absolutely legal and justified. We find no force in the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants. The special appeal is devoid of any merit and the same is, accordingly, dismissed in limine. Stay Application No. 12500/2012 also stands dismissed.;