JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) The substantial question to be answered in this appeal is
"Whether in terms of the compromise, Exhibits 5 and 7, the sale deed, Exhibit A/2,
executed by defendant No. 1 in favour of defendant Nos. 2 to 4 is legal and valid?"
During the course of hearing, no further substantial question of law was raised.
(2.) The dispute is with regard to 33 decimal of land (Schedule A to the plaint) having a
well and house in Khata No. 167 plot
No. 1326 of village - Barsot, P.S. Barhi,
Hazaribagh, bounded in north by Gautam
Rasul, South G. T. Road, East Rasta, West
Ramchandra Mahto. The plaintiffs claim the
lands on the basis of two registered sale
deeds each for 16 decimals of land, Exts.3,
3/A, executed by Jangli Khalifa son of
Dukhan Khalifa on 10-12-1981, for consideration of Rs. 19.000/- and possession
thereof by living in the house and cultivating the land so purchased. The said land
was sold by defendant No. 1, Raho Khalifa,
a brother of Dukhan (father of vendors of
plaintiff) by a registered sale deed to defendant Nos. 2 to 4, Dwarika Mahto and others.
Thus, the suit had been filed for a declaration that the subsequent sale is not binding on the
plaintiff and also for confirmation of his possession of the suit land and
in alternative, for recovery of the possession.
According to the plaintiffs, title to his vendor, Jangli Khalifa son of Dukhan Khalifa,
had arisen out of a partition among the three
brothers, when Dhukhan and his another
brother, Chhedi, got 50 decimals of land in
plot No. 1326 and Raho (the vendor of the
subsequent sale) got his share in the other
plot and after partition, his vendor's father
exercised proprietary rights over his share
by executing a conditional sale, which was
again reconveyed to him and also by mortgaging some part of the land in his share to
defendant No. 1, which was also redeemed.
Thereafter, in a proceeding under Section
145 Cr.P.C. in M. Case No. 178/76, a compromise petition, Ext. 5, was filed jointly by
Raho and Dhukhan. When Raho admitted
that 34 decimal of land in plot No. 1326
belonged to Dukhan and whatever in that
plot was sold by Dukhan to Ramchandra
will remain with Ramchandra and consequently, an order under Section 145 Cr.P.C.
Ext. 7, was passed, in return Raho got lands
and other plots as detailed in Ext. 5 and
possession of Ramchandra was declared.
And this 33 1/3 decimal of land has been
purchased by the plaintiff from Jangli
Khalifa son of Dukhan Khalifa. Thus, according to the plaintiffs, after the
compromise, as Raho, defendant No. 1, was left with
no right, title and interest in the land of plot
No. 1326 and thus, he could not have sold
the land, the sale made by him in favour of
defendant Nos. 2 to 4 was invalid, particularly when defendant No. 2 knew of the sale
in favour of plaintiffs already made by
Dukhan.
(3.) According to the written statement,
the partition among three brothers is admitted but according to
Raho Khalifa, defendant No. 1, in plot No. 1326, Raho and
Dukhan, got 25 decimals of land each, as
these lands were by the side of G.T. Road
and Chhedi got 51 decimals of land in the
plot as this was in back of the share of Raho
and Dukhan, so this extra land was given
to Chhedi. Thus, it was denied that Dukhan
had 50 decimals of land in plot No. 1326.
Plaintiffs claim that Dukhan sold 12 decimals of land to defendants No. 3-4 in plot
No. 1326 was said not to be fully correct
and it was stated that Dukhan sold 6 decimal on 31-3-76 in plot No. 1326, 4
decimals on 10-2-76 in the same plot and 8 decimals on 12-11-75 to defendant Nos. 3-4 and
put them in possession. The proceeding
under Section 144 Cr.P.C. was admitted, but
regarding compromise (Ext. 5), it was said
that defendant No. 1 became a victim of
fraud as compromise petition was not read
over to him and is not binding on defendants. In reply to Para 13 of the plaint, where
plaintiff had said that Raho Khalifa got in
turn lands in other plot, it was said in Para
13 of the written statement that it was false
and Raho Khalifa got land to the extent of
51 decimal in plot No. 1326 and other lands
stated above.;