The validity of a registered sale deed is presumed and the burden of proving its invalidity due to fraud lies on the challengers.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

1. Plaintiff Sanjeev Guleria filed a civil suit for declaration that the sale deed executed by defendants No.1 to 3 (Dhakia @ Keher Singh, Siku @ Sanju and Vidya) in favour of defendants No.4-Ajay Kumar on 07.06.2013 and mutation No.2539 be declared null and void. A consequential relief of permanent prohibitory injunction for restraining defendant no. 4 from interfering with the possession of the plaintiff over the land comprised in Khewat No.524, Khatauni No.598, Khasra No.1175/1043 measuring 02-06-14 bighas situated in Mohal Garoru Tehsil Joginder Nagar, District Mandi, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the suit land) was also sought. It was asserted that defendants No. 1 to 3 were the owners of the suit land to the extent of 1/5th Share. They sold the suit land to the plaintiff on 10.07.2008 vide registered Sale Deed. The defendants did not appear before the Revenue Authorities and executed a Power of Attorney in favour of Smt. Salochana Guleria on 31.01.2012. The plaintiff is serving in the Army and remains away from his native place. The plaintiff visited Patwari, Patwar Circle Garoru in December 2013 with the original sale deed and Special Power of Attorney to get the mutation attested. Patwari informed the plaintiff that defendants No.1 to 3 had sold the suit land to defendant No.4. The plaintiff applied for a copy of the sale deed and came to know that they had sold their half share to the extent of 1/10th share in the suit land. Defendant No.4 is threatening to dispossess the plaintiff forcibly; hence, the suit was filed to seek the relief mentioned above.

2. Defendants No.1 to 3 opposed the suit by filing the written statement taking preliminary objections regarding lack of maintainability and cause of action, the plaintiff being estopped by his act and conduct to file the suit, the suit being bad for mis- joinder and non-joinder of parties and the suit having not been properly valued for the purpose of Court fees and jurisdiction. The contents of the plaint were denied on merits; however, the previous ownership of the defendants was not disputed. It was asserted that the defendants remained the owners of the suit land till 07.06.2013 and sold 1/10th share to defendant no.4 through the Registered Sale Deed. They are the owners of the rest of the land. They specifically denied that they had sold their share to the plaintiff on 10.07.2008, or executed any Power of Attorney in favour of Salochana Guleria. It was asserted that the plaintiff allured the defendants to sell him their half share for a consideration of Rs.2,30,000/-. He brought them from their house to Joginder Nagar on 08.07.2008. He advised them to sit outside the Tehsil Office at Jooginder Nagar. He went to the document writer and returned with some papers. He asked the defendants to put their signatures and when the defendants enquired about the nature of the papers, he informed them that these were the documents to sell their half share out of the suit land for a consideration of Rs.2,30,000/-. The defendants refused to put their signatures/thumb impression as no money was paid to them. The plaintiff assured them to pay the consideration after the registration of the documents or at the time of the attestation of the mutation. The defendants did not agree to this plea and left the Tehsil Campus. The plaintiff reached their house on 10.07.2008 and asked them to execute the sale deed regarding their half share as he wanted to construct a house by raising a loan from the department. The plaintiff also assured the defendants at the instance of the villagers and adjoining house owners that he would pay Rs.1,500/- as earnest money and wou