JUDGMENT :

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.

Petitioner is defendant No. 2 whereas the plaintiffs are respondents No. 1 to 5 and defendant No. 6 is the husband of respondent No. 1 and has been arraigned as defendant No. 1 in the suit whereas respondents No. 7 and 8 are defendants No. 4 and 5 in the suit.

2. Respondents No. 1 to 5 filed a suit for declaration that they alongwith respondent No. 6 constitute a joint Hindu family and the land detailed in the plaint a joint Hindu family anscestral and co-parcenary property and defendant No.1 being a Karta and manager of the property. A further declaration was sought to the effect that respondent No. 6 was not competent to sell the property without any legal necessity and therefore the sale deeds dated 08.01.2010, 05.01.2016, 26.05.2011 and 10.12.2015 were illegal, null and void and do not affect the right of the petitioner and are thus not binding upon him. However, at this stage, it needs to be mentioned that there was no prayer whatsoever for setting aside the sale deed.

3. The petitioner-defendant No. 2 contested the suit by filing written statement wherein a number of preliminary objections were raised, more particularly, to the effect that the