IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

233 RSA-4136-2015(O&M)

Date of decision: 23.03.2026 Vishal (minor through his mother) & Anr.

...Appellant(s)

Vs.

Smt. Krishna Devi & Others ...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Ajay Jain, Advocate for the appellants.

Mr. S.S. Khurana, Advocate for the respondents.

***

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

Present appeal has been filed by the defendants No.1 and 2 against the concurrent judgments and decrees of the learned Courts below whereby suit filed by the plaintiffs/contesting respondents No.1 and 2 herein, for declaration and possession along with consequential relief of permanent injunction, has been decreed by both the Courts below.

2. Brief facts of the case are that plaintiffs had filed the instant Civil Suit seeking declaration that the Release Deed No.133 dated 24.04.2007 and Mutation No.1595 dated 28.05.2007 are null and void to the extent of land purchased vide Sale Deed No.594 dated 06.06.2007 in compliance of registered Agreement to Sell dated 17.11.2006; and further that the plaintiff No.1 is entitled to get her name incorporated in the Revenue Record.

3. It was the pleaded case of the plaintiffs that defendant No.3 Pat Ram was the owner in possession of the suit property measuring 3 kanal 17 marla. He entered into an Agreement to Sell No.2313 dated 17.11.2006 with the plaintiff No.2 for sale of the suit land for total sale consideration at the rate of Rs.20 lakh per acre. Defendant No.3 had received Rs.2 lakh as earnest money at the time of execution of Agreement. Sale Deed was to be executed by 30.06.2007. Accordingly, defendant No.3 had executed Sale Deed No.594 dated 06.06.2007 and had received the entire sale consideration before the Sub-Registrar. It was further pleaded that however, when plaintiff No.1 approached the Halqa Patwari for incorporating Sale Deed No.594 dated 06.06.2007 in the Revenue Record, she came to know that defendant No.3 had already disposed of his entire share in the agricultural land by way of Release Deed No.133 dated 24.04.2007 in favour of defendants No.1 and 2 i.e. the appellants herein. It was alleged that Defendant No.3 in collusion with defendants No.1 and 2 and their mother Savita, cheated the plaintiffs with mala fide intention. Accordingly, a declaration was sought that the said Release Deed is illegal, null and void. The plaintiffs had approached the defendants to get the Release Deed cancelled but to no avail. As such, present Suit was filed on 26.07.2007.

4. Defendant/respondent No.3 had filed written statement supporting the case of the appellants and submitting that Plaintiff No.1 is not a bona fide purchaser of the suit land. Defendant No.3 Denied execution of Agreement to Sell dated 17.11.2006 and receipt of earnest money. Alleged Agreement to Sell dated 17.11.2006 and the Sale Deed dated 06.06.2007 are without consideration, based upon fraud and misrepresentation. It was alleged that Plaintiffs were having complete knowledge regarding Release Deed dated 24.04.2007 and Mutation No.1595 dated 28.05.2007. It was further contended that Release Deed executed in favour of defendants No.1 and 2/appellants as they were having pre-existing rights in the suit property.

5. The defendants No.1 & 2/appellants had also filed written statement, resisting the suit and submitting that Appellants are owners in possession of 1/6^th share in the land owned and possessed by defendant No.3 including the suit land. Defendant No.3 never entered into Agreement to Sell in favour of the plaintiffs. Sale Deed dated 06.06.2007 is an illegal transaction between the plaintiffs and defendant No.3. No payment made before Sub- Registrar. It was further contented that the appellants are not bound by the terms of Agreement dated 17.11.2006 and Sale Deed dated 06.06.2007. Whereas Plaintiffs are bound by the terms of Release Deed dated 24.04.2007. 6. Upon appraisal of pleadings and oral & documentary evidence adduced by the parties, learned Additional