Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

This suit is filed by the plaintiff against the defendants for the relief of declaration and possession.

2. The brief facts leading to the plaintiff's case are summarized as under:-

The subject matter of the suit is detailed in the schedule of the property which is said to be an immoveable property bearing khatha No.368/359/340/65/2B/4/2, site No.4/2, new site No.72/2 situate at Bommanahalli village, Begur Hobli, Bengaluru south. The plaintiff claims to be the absolute owner in possession of the schedule property which he claims to have purchased under a registered sale deed dated 29.09.1988 from one Smt.Lakshamma. It is further stated that the original sale deed is in the custody of defendant No.1. The plaintiff further submits that he was a KSRP employee and during 1992 as he was unable to look after the schedule property on account of his avocation and busy schedule since he used to shift for the work from one place to another, he approached defendant No.2 requesting him to manage the schedule property and accordingly he executed a power of attorney in his favour. It has been further carved out that after sometime defendant No.2 expressed his inability to manage and supervise the schedule property and requested the plaintiff to appoint defendant No.1 who is the relative of the defendant No.2 as his power of attorney and as per his suggestion the plaintiff said to have executed a notarized GPA dated 13.03.1992 in favour of defendant No.1 to look after the schedule property and the original is said to be in her custody. The plaintiff has further stated that on many occasions he requested defendant No.1 not to deal with the schedule property either by alienating or raising loan on the said property and not to approach any authority for transfer of khatha in her name, but inspite of it the defendant No.1 with a malafide intention by playing fraud on him got the khatha transferred in her name as holder khatha. It has been further alleged that when he came to know about this fraudulent act of defendant No.1 he said to have approached defendant No.2 requesting him to advise defendant No.1 not to mismanage or misuse power of attorney and not to act detrimental to his interest, but defendant No.2 by colluding with defendant No.1 did not heed to his request. It is further stated that the plaintiff who was to return to Bengaluru from his official duty, approached and requested defendant No.2 to cancel and return the GPA executed in his favour as well as one executed in favour of defendant No.1 since the plaintiff was able to manage himself and to deal with the schedule property. It is further alleged that despite his repeated requests and demands, defendant Nos.1 & 2 did not bother about the same nor they returned the power of attorney. It is further alleged that defendant No.1 had tried to enter into an agreement of sale in order to alienate the schedule property in collusion with defendant No.2 and both started acting against the interest of the plaintiff. The plaintiff has further stated that in order to revoke the GPA dated 13.03.1992 he got issued a legal notice to defendant No.1 & 2 by cancelling power of attorney and instructing them not to deal with the schedule property and to return the original GPA. It is further alleged that on receiving the said notice, defendant No.2 with a malafide intention by colluding with defendant No.1, received both the notices for himself and also on behalf of defendant No.1 since both are residing in the same address. It is further alleged that though the legal notice was served upon the defendant Nos.1 & 2 on 20.12.2010 but despite having knowledge of cancellation of the said GPA with a malafide intention by colluding with each other, defendant No.1 transacted for alienation of the schedule property even though the said power of attorney was revoked by the plaintiff. It is further alleged that they have not even issued any reply to his legal notice and in order to deprive the plaintiff of his legitimate right over the schedule property, the defendant No.1 alleged to have executed a registered sale deed in favour of defendant No.3 who is none other than her son and thereby defendant Nos.1 & 2 alleged to have played fraud and misrepresentation despite knowing the fact that as on the date of alleged sale deed, the GPA was already revoked by the plaintiff. It is further alleged that after coming to know of such fraudulent acts of defendant No.1 & 2, he applied for encumbrance certificate on 29.06.203 and came to know the sale transaction between defendant Nos.1 & 3 to which defendant No.2 had signed as a witness and thereby the defendants alleged to have fraudulently created the said sale deed in order to grab the schedule property. Thus the plaintiff having left with no other alternative, said to have come up with the present suit seeking declaration regarding the nullity of the said sale deed executed in favour of defendant No.3 by defendant No.1 and on their failure to comply with the directions of the court, to get executed and registered the cancellation of sale deed dated 22.12.2010 through the process of court. He has also sought for relief of mandatory injunction against defendant No.3 directing him to deliver the vacant possession of the schedule property along with all the original documents pertaining to suit schedule property.
It is true to suggest that in both GPA I have authorized the GPA holder to get changed the khatha and also to pay taxes and also to sell the property. It is false to suggest that, after taking Rs. 1,40,000/- from the defendants No.1 and 2 I executed GPA.
22. Even in the further cross examination of PW1 dtd. 25.01.2018 in para 9 he has unequivocally admitted that under Ex.D1, he had even authorized D-1 to construction house on the suit property. This material piece of his admission runs thus: