JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This second appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment and decree passed in Regular Civil Appeal No.348 of 1984 by the learned IInd Additional District Judge, Beed, dated 17.09.1994.

3. The appellants were the defendants, the respondents Nos.1 to 3 were the plaintiffs and respondent no. 4 was the defendant no. 1.

4. The brief facts of the case were that the plaintiffs had filed a suit for reconveyance and possession of the suit land survey No. 20/AA/@ of village Charatha, Tq. and District Beed, with mesne profit. The plaintiffs had a case that they were the brothers inter se, and defendant No.1 was their father. The fathers of defendant no.1 and defendant no.2 were the real brothers. They had confidence in each other. The suit land was the ancestral joint family property of plaintiffs and defendant no.1. They did not deny the execution of the sale deed by plaintiff no.1 and defendant no.1 in favour of defendant no.2 on 14.06.1971. It was a registered conditional sale deed for a nominal consideration of Rs.1,000/-. Defendant no.2 had agreed to reconvey the suit land in favour