The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the Registration Act, 1908, and the requirement for admissibility of the family settlement document.

JUDGMENT :- These appeals, preferred under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, are directed against the judgment and decree dated 7-5-1979, passed by Civil Judge, Dehradun, in civil appeal No. 145 of 1978 and civil appeal No. 22 of 1979, whereby the judgment and decree dated 30-10-1978, passed by IIIrd Additional Munsif, Dehradun, in Civil Suit No. 257 of 1977, and judgment and decree dated 4-4-1979, passed by Munsif, Dehradun, in Civil Suit No. 268 of 1977, are reversed.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. Factual matrix of the case is that two suits i.e. Original Suit No. 257 of 1977 and 268 of 1977, are filed by plaintiff/appellant Mani Ram, one for cancellation of gift deed, executed in favour of the defendant/respondent Sada Nand Dobhal, and another suit for cancellation of sale deed, executed in favour of defendant Padma Datta and Dev Datta respectively. Both the deeds are said to have been executed by Jeet Ram Bahuguna, father of the plaintiff/appellant. Defendant/respondents Padma Datta and Dev Datta, are real brothers, of plaintiff/appellant, while Sada Nand Dobhal (defendant/respondent) is brother-in-law of the plaintiff (son-in-law of Jeet Ram Bahuguna). It is pleaded by the plaintiffs in both the suits that Jeet Ram Bahuguna being head of the Joint Hindu Family, owned landed property in Tehri Garhwal and apart from plot No. 800/4, measuring area of .65 acres and plot No. 800/11, measuring area 2.82 acres in village Nathuwala, District Dehradun. The plaintiff pleaded in both the suits that during life time his father Jeet Ram Bahuguna, partitioned the property amongst his three sons and his two brothers namely, Padma Datta and Dev Datta through a family settlement dated 27-3-1961 to which all the three brothers and their father were parties. The plaintiff's father (Jeet Ram Bahuguna) died on 20-2-1976. After his death when the plaintiff suggested his brothers to move mutation application for substitution of their names, he was informed that the mutation had already taken place. He was told that the landed property in Tehri Garhwal, has been mutated equally in the names of plaintiff and his brothers. Plaintiff thereafter sought mutation in respect of landed property of his father, situated in Nathuwala, Dehradun, but he came to know that on 10-7-1977, said land had already been mutated in favour of his brother-in-law Sada Nand Dobhal (defendant) to the extent of half share. On inspection of the record, the plaintiff came to know that his father has executed registered gift deed dated 3-11-1969 in favour of his brother-in-law Sada Nand Dobhal (son-in-law of donor). He also came to know that in the remaining half share in the land situated, at Nathuwala, Dehradun, plaintiff's father has executed registered sale deed dated 7-4-1970 in favour of Padma Datta and Dev Datta (brothers of plaintiff). The plaintiff's case is that his father had no right to execute the aforesaid gift deed and the sale deed in favour of the defendants, as the property was already been partitioned vide settlement deed dated 27-3-1961. Hence two separate suits were filed for cancellation of gift deed and the sale deed.

4. In original suit No. 257 of 1977 (for cancellation of gift deed) in written statement filed by defendant Sada Nand Dobhal, it is pleaded that the property in question at Nathuwala, Dehradun, is a self acquired property of Jeet Ram Bahuguna, which he purchased in the year 1950. In said year, itself he expressed his view that he would be parting half share to the answering defendant in said property and accordingly later on transferred 10 bighas of land through impugned gift deed (a registered document). It is specifically pleaded that no undue influence was exercised on the donor nor any fraud was played. It is also pleaded that the suit is barred by limitation. It is also pleaded by said defendant that the family settlement was executed or enforced. In suit No. 268 of 1977, defendants Padma

Click Here to Read the rest of this document