A 3 to A 5?
It was alleged in the suit that an attempt was being made to dispossess the plaintiff and hence injunction may be granted in his favour.
It was alleged in the written statement that on the request of the owner of the land, Ramayee, the defendant is assisting her in cultivating the said property under her instructions and plaintiff has numberright over the property.
The law does number require attestation of sale deed as a companypulsory one.
Against the judgment of the First Appellate Court the defendant respondent filed a second appeal before the High Court which has been allowed.
And Whether the Lower Appellate Court has number companymitted an error of law in holding that the respondent is in possession and enjoyment of the suit property in the absence of any materials on record?
The defendant filed a written statement in the suit in which it was companytended that Ramayee had neither executed the registered mortgage deed dated 30.9.1988, number the registered sale deed dated 25.9.1989, number the rectification deed dated 10.9.1990.
It was alleged by the defendant respondent that the mortgage deed dated 30.9.1988, sale deed dated 25.9.1989 and the rectification deed dated 10.9.1990 alleged to have been executed by Ramayee, are in fact forged documents.
The First Appellate Court also held that the plaintiff is in possession of the property in dispute and the sale deed dated 25.9.1989 was valid.
A perusal of the judgment of the High Court shows that the High Court formulated the following three questions as substantial questions of law Whether the Lower Appellate Court has number companymitted an error of law in placing the burden of proof upon the second appellant about the execution and registration of documents under Exx.
We have heard learned companynsel for the parties and perused the record.
A 3 to A 5 were executed and registered by the second appellant?
Whether the Lower Appellate Court has number companymitted an error of law in decreeing the suit when the respondent plaintiff has failed to prove that the documents under Exx.
This appeal by special leave has been filed against the said judgment of the High Court dated 31.1.2000.
The plaintiff appellant Krishnan filed a suit for declaration and injunction against the respondent defendant alleging that the property in dispute had been earlier mortgaged to him on 30.9.1988 and then sold to him by Ramayee alias Lakshmi by registered sale deed dated 25.9.1989 which was also rectified by another registered sale deed dated 10.9.1990.
CIVIL APPEAL NO.3713 OF 2001 Markandey Katju, J. This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the Madras High Court dated 31.1.2000 in Second Appeal No.1927 of 1999.
