Heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties at length. The second appeal was heard for admission on 15-12-2011, when this Court was pleased to issue notice to the respondent. Ad interim relief was granted in terms of prayer clause (B) of the civil application. When this matter was taken up for hearing on 08-02-2012, this Court observed that, looking to the nature of controversy involved in the matter, it is appropriate to dispose of the matter finally at admission stage and accordingly, the matter is finally heard.

2. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that, both the Courts below have proceeded on the footing that burden lies on the present appellant in respect of proving fraud, when it is an admitted position that the present appellant is blind person, and therefore, the burden lies on the respondent to prove that the sale deed is genuine one. In support of this contention that, since the appellant is blind, and therefore, burden lies on the respondent to prove the sale deed is genuine one, learned Counsel for the appellant placed reliance upon the reported judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Mst. Sethani vs. Bhana [AIR 1993 SC 956].

3. It is