March 13, 2001 : The Chhattisgarh High Court has refused to interfere in a property dispute where the appellant claimed over-writing in a sale-deed and argued that the suit had abated after the original owner’s death.
Justice R.S. Garg heard the matter on admission. The appellant, represented by counsel Shri Agrawal, challenged the First Appellate Court’s reliance on sale-deed Ex. P-3, saying the document bore overwritings and could not be treated as reliable. The judge observed that assessing the genuineness of documents is a core fact-finding task for trial and appellate courts. Unless a finding is shown to be perverse, a second appeal cannot upset it. On the record, Justice Garg found no perversity in the earlier court’s conclusion.
The appellant also argued that he was a bona fide purchaser for value and therefore the plaintiff’s suit for possession could not succeed. The court rejected that line of defence. The judge noted the Lower Court’s finding that the original owner, Ganga Bai, had already sold the property to the plaintiff before conveying it to the appellant. Once the vendor’s rights were extinguished by an earlier sale, the later transfer could not create title in the subsequent buyer.
Finally, the appellant said the suit had abated after Ganga Bai’s death because her legal representatives were not brought on record. The court examined the plaint and the reliefs sought and concluded that Ganga Bai had been a formal party only. The plaintiff’s grievance was against the appellant for alleged dispossession under the later sale-deed. The judge observed that the cause of action against the appellant survived and an injunction claim would not automatically fail because the legal representatives of Ganga Bai were not joined unless they were actively interfering with possession.
Finding no substantial question of law raised by the appeal, the court dismissed the second appeal and closed the matter.
Case Reference : Second Appeal No. 666 of 1994, Gyan Chand v. Balkrishna Shrivastava and Others; Counsel for the Appellant/Plaintiff: Shri H.B. Agrawal, Advocate; Counsel for the Respondents/Defendants: Shri N.L. Shrivastava, Advocate.
