JUDGMENT :

R.C. Patnaik, J. - The substantial question of law that has arisen for an answer in this Second Appeal is: whether a deed of transfer executed under fraud and misrepresentation, is void or voidable?

2. Admittedly, the Plaintiff was the owner of the disputed property. The father of the Defendants, a resident of Bihar, came to village Laing-the village of the Plaintiff-a decade and a half before and after taking shelter in the house of some villagers approached the Plaintiff for accommodation. He, however, did not, though an assurance was given to the Plaintiff that he would shift from the cow-shed, which he was allowed to occupy, after the rainy season. On some pretext or other he deferred. In the year 1970, the Plaintiff was requested by one Dutia Gartia to act as an attesting witness in a deed of mortgage which was being executed by one Sukhram Sahu in his favour. He was taken to Rajgangpur and was made to sign on a document. The Plaintiff was an illiterate ignorant man. He put his left thumb impression at the place where he was required to. When preliminary parcha in respect of the lands was not granted to him at the, attestation camp of the settlement but to Defendants