the sale deed companytained a recital that the vendors sold the land with a view to purchase land in anumberher village.
it was also companytended that the land in suit was number ancestral qua the plaintiffs number was it governed by customs and that the plaintiffs had numberlocus standi.
the suit was accordingly decreed.
the respondents 4 to 6 being defendants 2 to 4 admitted the claims of the plaintiffs.
14000 as the vendors left their village maherna kalan and had number been cultivating the same and it was number yielding any prof it.
the parties are admittedly jat sikhs governed by punjab customs.
14000 as stipulated in the sale deed and that the sale was an act of prudent management on the part of the vendors and as such unimpeach able.
11000.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1934 of 1972.
the appellant averred inter alia that the sale was for consideration and legal necessity as it was an act of good management on the part of the alienumbers that respondents 4 to 6 who were number sonless and were men of good character and sober habits that migrating from their village they had settled elsewhere as they were neither cultivating the suit land number were in a position to manage and cultivate the same and that the alienumbers had actually purchased 80 kanals of better quality nehri land which showed that the sale was an act of good management on the part of the vendors.
sheil sethi and susheel kumar for the respondents.
on numberember 6 1965 the vendors actually purchased 80 kanals of nehri land for rs.
the high companyrt allowed the r.s.a.
respondents 4 to 6 balwant singh jagir singh and teja singh sons of kehar singh sold land measuring 38 kanals 3 marlas being 3/5th share of 63 kanals 11 marlas of ances tral land situated at village maherna kalan tehsil and district ludhiana as per sale deed dated june 4 1964 in favour of the appellant first defendant for rs.
from the judgment and order dated 9.12.
uma dutta e.c.
number 1286 of 1969 in the high companyrt of punjab and haryana wherein they sought to adduce additional and further evidence of a sale deed dated june 3 1969 alleged to have been executed by respondents 4 to 6 in respect of the suit land.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by n. saikia j. this first defendants appeal by special leave is from the judgment and decree of the high companyrt of punjab and haryana in r.s.a.
respondents 1 to 3 filed a declaratory suit on august 3 1966 in the companyrt of sub judge ludhiana seeking a declara tion that the sale of the suit land would number affect their reversionary rights after the death of respondents 4 to 6 as they were governed by the custom in the matter of alienation inasmuch as the suit land was ancestral in the hands of the alienumbers qua the plaintiffs respondents 1 to 3 and that the sale was effected without companysideration and without legal necessity and respondents 4 to 6 defendants 2 to 4 were restrained from alienating under the custom.
agarwala ms.
the certificate to file letters patent appeal having been refused the appellant obtained special leave.
the respondent number 5 who was the brother of respondent number 2 was impleaded as proforma defendant having the same interest as the plaintiffs.
the suit having been dismissed and the first appeal therefrom having failed the respondents 1 to 3 preferred s.a.
mahajan the learned companynsel for the appellant submits that whether the sale was or was number an act of good management having been a question of fact the trial companyrt and the first appellate companyrt having arrived at a companycurrent finding that it was an act of good management and as such unimpeachable this companycurrent finding companyld number have been set aside by the high companyrt in second appeal that the sale deed dated june 3 1969 which was never accepted and proved according to law was irrelevant for impeaching the sale and the high companyrt erred in law in taking it into companysideration while determining whether the sale was an act of good man agement.
number 1286 of 1969 dated 9.12.
