Vineet Kothari, J. - (1.) By the impugned order dated 17.10.2015, the learned trial court of the Additional District Judge No.1, Hanumangarh, in the present suit for cancellation of the sale deed purportedly executed by plaintiff-Ajmer Singh himself, rejected the temporary injunction application with the following observations:- ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]...
(2.) Mr. Ramniwas Choudhary, learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant submitted that the sale deed was executed by misleading the plaintiff, whereas he believed the said document to be a document of mortgage and the defendant-Narendra Singh himself was of the same village, to which the plaintiff belongs and under such misconception, the sale deed was executed, cancellation of which was sought in the present suit. The suit property in question is an agricultural land in chak No.2 B.R.P.Patthar No.12/355, Murabba No.47, Kila No.11/2, 20, 21, measuring 0.595 hectares, totalling 1.265 hectares was purportedly sold for L 25,50,000/-. The learned trial court has rejected the temporary injunction application filed by the plaintiff, not believing the plaint averments and the arguments raised in the first instance.
(3.) Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff-appellant, this Court is satisfied that the impugned order does not call for any interference. A big amount of L 25,50,000/- is said to have been paid to the plaintiff-vendor for transfer of the agricultural land and if the plaintiff wants to resile from such an agreement and execution of the sale deed, heavy burden lies upon him to prove that these registered documents have been executed under a mistake of fact or any other factors influencing the validity of such document/transaction.;