Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—This is defendant’s appeal under Section 100 C.P.C. This Court formulated following substantial questions of law after hearing under Order 41 Rule 11 C.P.C.:

“i. Whether the lower Appellate Court is justified in reversing the findings of Trial Court that plaintiff failed to prove fraud warranting cancellation of sale-deed and reasoning given by lower Appellate Court are founded on legally admissible evidence?

ii. Whether the plaint disclose requisite facts needed to be pleaded for making a case of fraud?”

2. Sri Manish Goyal, Advocate, has made his indepth threadbare arguments covering the entire aspects of the matter relevant for adjudication of the aforesaid questions of law with great ability, and, Sri Anil Sharma, learned counsel appearing for respondents, has met the plaintiff’s case by advancing his arguments with a similar ability and that is how both the sides have placed enough material as also a number of precedential authorities to make it convenient for this Court to arrive at a just conclusion.

3. Now before proceeding further, I find it appropriate to have a brief factual matrix of the entire litigation, which would be of much help f