A registered sale deed is presumed valid, and the burden to prove fraud lies on the party alleging it, requiring substantial evidence to support such claims.

JUDGMENT :

E.S. INDIRESH, J.

1. RSA No.2358 of 2017 is filed by the defendant No.1, assailing the judgment and decree dated 13.09.2017 in R.A.No.76 of 2012 on the file of Senior Civil Judge at Somawarapete, dismissing the appeal and confirming the judgment and decree dated 25.09.2012 in O.S.No.28 of 2003 on the file of Additional Civil Judge at Somawarapete, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff.

2. RSA No.2359 of 2017 is filed by the defendant No.1, assailing the judgment and decree dated 13.09.2017 in R.A.No.16 of 2013 on the file of Senior Civil Judge at Somawarapete, dismissing the appeal and confirming the judgment and decree dated 25.09.2012 in O.S.No.29 of 2003 on the file of Additional Civil Judge at Somawarapete, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff.

3. For the sake of convenience, parties are referred with reference to their rank before the Trial Court.

4. Facts in both the original suits are almost identical in nature. Facts in nutshell as averred in the plaint are that, the plaintiff along with her brother - Basappa had purchased the land bearing Sy.No.76, measuring 4.94 acres at Gummanacolly Village, as per the registered Sale Deed dated 31.05.2000. Thereafter, registered partition was effected between the plaintiff and her brother - Basappa in which, 01 acre of the land was allotted to the share of the plaintiff and remaining land to an extent of 3.94 acres of land was allotted to the share of her brother-Basappa. It is stated that, the plaintiff is a widow and had five sons and two daughters. Defendant No.2 is one of the sons of the plaintiff. It is further averred in the plaint that, the plaintiff was residing with her sons - Chandrashekar and Manjunatha. It is also stated that, the defendant No.2 and other children were residing separately, however, the children of the plaintiff were visiting their mother regularly. It is further stated that, the defendant No.2 had sand business and in this connection, the plaintiff with an intention to help the defendant No.2 to raise loan from the bank, and further, the defendant No.2 had approached the plaintiff to mortgage the suit schedule property to an extent of 01 acre as mentioned above, the plaintiff decided to mortgage the suit land. It is the case of the plaintiff that, in the guise of execution of the Mortgage Deed, so as to avail loan from the bank, defendant No.2 took the plaintiff to the Office of the Sub-Registrar, Somawarapet, and in the presence of defendant Nos.1 and 3, fraudulently got executed the registered Sale Deed dated 16.04.2001. It is the case of the plaintiff that, believing the version of the defendants as to the execution of the Mortgage Deed, plaintiff has put her left thumb impression on the documents furnished by the defendants. It is further stated that, the defendant No.1 tried to put up fence around 01 acre of the land of the suit schedule property and at that juncture, it came to the knowledge of the plaintiff and her elder son - Chandrashekar that the registered Sale Deed dated 16.04.2001 has been executed in favour of defendant No.1, illegally. It is the case of the plaintiff that, the plaintiff had no intention to sell the suit schedule property in favour of the defendant No.1 and the plaintiff has been deceived by the defendants and as such, the plaintiff has filed O.S. Nos.28 of 2003 and 29 of 2003, seeking cancellation of the registered Sale Deeds dated 16.04.2001.

5. After service of summons, the defendants entered appearance and filed written statement. It is the defence of defendant Nos.1 and 3 that, the suit schedule property has been sold in favour of the defendant No.1 for a valuable consideration of Rs.5,65,000/-. It is also stated that, the defendant No.1-Karibasappa (in OS No. 29 of 2003) along with his cousin-Shambulingappa, had paid Rs.65,000/- as advance sale consideration and thereafter, on 24.03.2001, the plaintiff had received Rs.2,00,000/- from the defendant No.1- Karibasappa (in OS No. 29 of 2003) as further advance amount a