Property inherited after the Hindu Succession Act is treated as separate property, affirming a vendor's absolute right to sell without objections from family members.

JUDGMENT :

ROHIT W.JOSHI, J.

1. These four second appeals are pertaining to the same property and same parties. They involve common dispute and are therefore being decided by common judgment. Second Appeals arise out of two different suits being Regular Civil Suit No.15/2012 (Old Special Civil Suit No.11/2008) and Regular Civil Suit No.39/2007.

2. The appellants in Second Appeal Nos.148/2024 and 156/2024 had filed Regular Civil Suit No.39/2007 inter alia seeking decree of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant No.1 from selling the suit property to the defendant No.2 in the said suit. The plaintiffs in the said suit are wife and children of defendant No.1. It is their case that the suit property which is an agricultural land bearing Gat No.138 of village Shivar, Tahsil Daryapur, District Amravati admeasuring 1.70 HR is Joint Family property of plaintiffs and defendant No.1 in the said suit and that the defendant No.1 had intention to sell the suit property to the defendant No.2 in order to satisfy his vices. It is stated that the defendant No.1 was addicted to liquor and was intending to sell the suit property to the defendant No.2 in order to meet expenses for the same.

3. The defendant No.1 (Vendor) filed a Pursis admitting the entire claim of the plaintiffs. However, his application seeking permission to file written statement is rejected by the learned trial Court. The defendant No.2 filed written statement in the suit and denied all adverse allegations in the plaint. Defendant No.2 contended that the defendant No.1 had entered into an agreement of sale with respect to suit property with him for a valuable consideration of Rs.1,29,500/-. The defendant No.2 stated that defendant No.1 had also executed sale-deed in his favour and had delivered possession of the suit property to him. It was further stated that on the same day i.e. on 11/07/2007, the defendant No.1 had repaid loan of Rs.12,200/- to Daryapur Seva Sahakari Society. The defendant No.2 contended that the sale-deed could not be registered since the plaintiff No.1 visited the office of Sub Registrar while the said sale-deed was about to be registered and created ruckus. The defendant No.1 denied that suit property was Joint Hindu Family property and claimed that defendant No.1 was sole and absolute owner of the same.

4. The plaintiffs in Regular Civil Suit No.39/2007 will be referred as “objectors”, the defendant No.1 will be referred as “vendor (Karta)” and the defendant No.2 will be referred as “purchaser” in the body of the judgment hereinafter.

5. The learned trial Court dismissed the said suit vide judgment and decree dated 12/07/2012. The objectors/plaintiffs have preferred Regular Civil Appeal No.100/2012, challenging the said decree. The said appeal came to be allowed vide judgment and decree dated 05/10/2023. The judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court came to be quashed and set aside and a decree for perpetual injunction was passed in favour of the plaintiffs/objectors thereby restraining the defendant No1-vendor from selling the suit property to the defendant No.2 – purchaser. However, the learned first Appellate Court had recorded a finding that the defendant No.1 - vendor had entered into agreement of sale with the defendant No.2 - purchaser and that the defendant No.2 - purchaser had paid a sum of Rs.1,29,500/- to the defendant No.1 - vendor. The plaintiffs (objectors) have filed Second Appeal No.156/2024, challenging the said finding, recorded by the learned first Appellate Court.

6. Likewise, the purchaser/defendant No.2 has preferred Second Appeal No.156/2024, challenging the said judgment and decree dated 05/10/2023, passed by the learned first Appellate Court in Regular Civil Suit No.100/2012, since the suit filed by the objectors came to be decreed.

7. The purchaser, who is defendant No.2 in Regular Civil Suit No.39/2007 filed a separate suit being Regular Civil Suit No.15/2012 (Old Special Civil Suit No.11/2008) inter alia seeking