SHIVKALI BAI Vs. MEERA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment shall also govern the disposal of Second Appeal No. 566 of 1982 filed by Smt. Meera Devi (plaintiff) and Second Appeal No. 12 of 1983 filed by Nanhe Lal (defendant No. 4) against a common judgment and decree dated 18 -10 -1982 in Civil Appeal No. 21 -A of 1981 of the Court of the Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Seoni, arising out of Civil Suit No. 69 -A of 1979 of the Court of Civil Judge, Class I, Seoni and judgment and decree dated 17 -1 -1981.

(2.) FOR convenience, the genealogy of the defendants is reproduced: - <FRM>JUDGEMENT_92_TLMPH0_1989.htm</FRM>

(3.) PLAINTIFF Smt. Meera Devi brought a suit for partition and allotment of 2/3rd share of the suit lands to the share of defendants Nos. 1 and 2 and for possession or for possession of any other land of equal value and lastly for a direction to the defendants to render accounts of mesne profits from 5 -2 -1968 till the date of suit and thereafter till the delivery of possession of the lands on the allegations that in pursuance of agreement dated 10 -1 -1968 (Ex.P -1) she purchased the suit Khasras Nos. from defendants Kanchan Singh and Mohan Singh on consideration of Rs. 8,000/ - by registered sale deed dated 5 -2 -1968 (Ex.P. -2). She had earlier filed Civil Suit No. 81 -A of 1969 in the Court of 1st Civil Judge, Class II, Seoni, for possession of the suit khasra numbers, which was dismissed by judgment dated 23 -2 -1970. First Civil Appeal No. 34 -A of 1970 was also dismissed on 14 -8 -1970 by judgment Ex.P -3 affirming the judgment of the trial Court observing that she was not entitled to be placed in possession of the property purchased by her and her only remedy was to sue for general partition and to ask for allotment of the property purchased by her to the share of her vendors and to claim possession of the property purchased or any other property of equivalent value. Therefore, she instituted the present suit on 28 -11 -1970 with the prayers for the aforesaid reliefs. The plaintiff pleaded that out of the consideration of Rs. 8,000/ -, a sum of Rs. 3,000/ - was paid to defendants 1 and 2 in cash on the date of agreement and the balance of Rs. 5,000/ - was to be paid at the time of execution and registration of the sale deed. By amendment, the plaintiff pleaded that out of the said Rs. 5,000/ -, the parties agreed that the plaintiff would repay Rs. 3,000/ - directly to the creditor of vendors Seth Mangilal, Rs. 132/ - towards Takavi loan and Rs. 210/ - towards land revenue to the Government and the balance of Rs. 1,658/ - was paid before the registering officer. In alternative the plaintiff pleaded that the payment of full consideration to the vendors was not a condition precedent to the passing of the title and that she acquired title from the moment the sale deed was registered in her favour.