2025:CGHC:10978 AFR Judgment Reserved on :25.02.2025 Judgment Delivered on :06.03.2025 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR First Appeal No. 171 of 2007 Hirendra Kashyap S/o Late Shri Parmanand Kashyap, aged about 51 years, Caste Aghariya Occupation Agriculture R/o Village Singanpur Tehsil Basna District Mahasamund (CG).

... Appellant versus

1 - Laxminarayan Soni, S/o. Gangaprasad Soni, aged about 56 years, 2 - Sunil Kumar, S/o. Laxminarayan Soni, aged about 25 years, 3 - Pradeep Kumar Soni, S/o. Laxminarayan Soni, aged about 23 years, Respondents 1 to 3 : Occupation Agriculture, R/o. Village Singanpur, Tehsil Basna, District Mahasamund (CG)

4 - Smt. Sarita Agrawal, W/o. Pawan Agrawal, aged about 41 years, R/o. Village Joginipali, (Balodiya Rice Mill), Thana & Tahsil Saraipali, Distt. Mahasamund (CG)

5 - State of Chhattisgarh through the Collector, Mahasamund District Mahasamund (CG)

... Respondent(s)

For Appellant : Mr. Saurabh Gupta, Advocate For Respondents 1 to 3 : None present For Respondent No.4 : Mr. HB Agrawal, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Preeti Yadav, Advocate For Respondent No.5/State : Mr. Rajeev Bharat, Govt. Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)

C A V Judgment

1. This first appeal has been preferred by the appellant/plaintiff under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging the judgment and decree dated 02.11.2007 passed by District Judge, Mahasamund in Civil Suit No.8A/2006, dismissing the civil suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff against Digitally signed

by BINI

BINI PRADEEP

PRADEEP Date:

2025.03.06

respondent/defendants to the extent of registration of sale deed in respect of suit property. However, alternative relief sought for by the plaintiff for refund of advance amount of Rs.40,000/-, has been granted by the trial Court in his favour.

[For sake of convenience , the parties would be referred to as per their status shown in the plaint filed before the trial Court]

2. Facts of the case, in nutshell are that, the plaintiff filed civil suit against defendants stating inter alia that defendant No.1 entered into agreement to sell suit property, i.e. piece of Khasra No.138 numbered as 138/2, area 0.56 hectare, situated at village Jhuipali, PH No.14, Revenue circle and Tahsil Basna, Distt. Mahasamund to him, as ‘Karta’ for sale consideration of Rs.1 lakh per acre. He had also received Rs.40,000/- as advance amount from the plaintiff and executed an agreement to sell on 08.3.2003 in stamp paper. Defendant No.1 had agreed to execute registered sale deed till 31.03.2003 after receiving outstanding sale consideration. He had also handed over possession of the suit property to the plaintiff, since then he is in possession over it. Despite repeated oral request to execute the sale deed, defendant No.1 kept procrastinating and assured the plaintiff that sale deed will be registered in his favour after entering names of defendants 2 & 3 (sons of defendant No.1) in revenue record as major, as their names have been recorded as minor. Subsequently, names of defendants 2 & 3 have been entered in revenue record on 04.01.2004 as major, thereafter the plaintiff again asked defendant No.1 for registration of sale deed, but, he did not do it even after service of legal notice, rather defendants 2 & 3 sold suit property to defendant No.4 vide registered sale deed. Therefore, the plaintiff filed civil suit for registration of sale deed in his favour by defendants 1 to 3 and he has also prayed that sale deed dated 06.01.2006 executed by defendants 2 & 3 in favour of defendant No.4 be declared null and void. Alternatively, he also sought relief for refund of advance amount with interest of 9%.

3. Defendants 1 to 3 remained ex-parte before the trial Court and they have not filed any written statement. Defendant No.4 filed written statement, in which she has denied substantive pleading of the plaintiff. She has denied that defendants 1 to 3 are members of the joint family and defendant No.1 is ‘Karta’ of the family