Ismail, J.- The first defendant in O.S. No. 107 of 1965 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Chingleput, is the appellant herein. Admittedly the suit property of an extent of 3.06 acres belonged to the partnership by name Haji M. Shaik Abdul Kader, M. S. Abdul Rahiman and Company, consisting of two partners Haji M. S. Abdul Rahiman Sahib and Haji M. S. Adam Mohideen Sahib. Haji M. S. Abdul Rahiman Sahib died on 30th April, 1958 leaving behind defendants 2 to 7 as his heirs and If gal representatives. Haji M. S. Adam Mohideen Sahib died on 12th March. 1955 leaving behind defendants 8 to 13 and one Habibma, who is not a party to these proceedings, as heirs and legal representatives. The first respondent herein claiming to have entrusted her jewels and liquid cash with the said partnership took proceedings for recovery of the same from defendants 2 to 13 herein out of the assets of the partnership in their hands. She filed a petition O.P. No. 295 of 1958, on the file of the City Civil Court, Madras represented by her son and next friend, as she was of unsound mind then. The said O.P. prayed for permission of the Court to institute a suit in forma pauperis. Subsequently it was transferred to this Court and numbered as C. S. No. 119 of 1960. Pending that suit, the first respondent obtained on nth July, 1961 an order of attachment of the suit property as well as another item of property in Application No. 1104 of 1961. However, it is admitted that the attachment was not effected. A decree in favour of the first respondent was passed by this Court for a sum of Rs. 29,130 on 34th November, 1961. Meanwhile, under Exhibit B-18 dated 5th June, 1961 the appellant herein entered into an agreement with defendants 2 to 13 for the purchase of the suit property for a consideration of Rs. 40,000. One of the debts for the discharge of which the suit property was agreed to be sold by defendants 2 to 13 was a debt in favour of the Eastern Bank Limited, Madras, and this fact was mentioned in Exhibit B-18 itself, even though the amount due to the Eastern Bank was not actually specified. Under the original of Exhibit B-19 dated 7th July, 1961, the appellant herein obtained an assignment of the decree in favour of the Eastern Bank Limited, for a consideration of Rs. 10,343-73. Thereafter, the appellant purchased the suit property under two sale-deeds, the originals of Exhibit B-2 dated 10th August, 1961 executed by defendants 3 to 13 and Exhibit B-3 dated 12th January, 1962 executed by the second defendant. With regard to the share of Habibma, the appellant executed the decree in favour of the Eastern Bank Limited, Madras, assigned in its favour under the original of Exhibit B-19, and purchased her share in the suit property, in Court-auction. Nearly three years after these sales, the present suit was instituted by the first respondent herein for the following reliefs:

“(b) declaration that the sale-deed dated 10th August, 1961 and 13th January, 1962 (mistake for 12th January, 1962) executed by defendants 2 to 13 in favour of 1st defendant is invalid and inoperative and not binding on the plaintiff;

(e) for setting aside the sale-deed dated 10th August, 1961 and 13th January, 1962 (mistake for 12th January, 1962) executed by defendants 2 to 13 in favour of the 1st defendant in respect of ‘B’ schedule;

(d) for an injunction restraining the 1st defendant from demolishing or constructing on the suit property”.

Subsequently, the plaint was amended by inclusion of the following prayer:

“(c) (1) or in the alternative for a decree for Rs. 39,760 as on 7th August, 1964 against the first defendant with 6 percent, interest in satisfaction of the decree in C.S. No. 119 of 1960 on the file of the High Court, Madras”.

In the plaint, the first respondent had contended that the sale of the suit property by defendants 2 to 13 in favour of the appellant herein was a collusive and fraudulent transaction entered into by the parties with the intention of defeatin

Click Here to Read the rest of this document