1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment and order of the learned Additional District Judge Raisinghnagar dated 23rd August, 1986 in Civil Suit No. 101/80.

3. The suit was filed by the appellants in the background that there was a land purchased in their name while the appellants were minor. These lands were sold by their father on 16.05.75 in the name of respondent Nos. 1 and 2. These lands were sold by their father purporting to be the guardian of the appellants. The recital of the sale deed show that the father of the appellants stated himself in the sale deed as the guardian of the minors. He made the sale as the guardian of the minors a reason for sale was that because the money was required for the family use.

4. The defendants contested and alleged that the father had every right to sell the property as the same was purchased by his money in the name of the plaintiffs who were minors and they were benamidars. The real owner was father only and, therefore, father had the right to sell the property. On the basis of the pleadings the following issues were framed :

1- D;k oknhx.k dk firk xqjc['kflag fook