Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(v) Had there been any such will dated 15th February, 1987 in favour of Smt. Malti Sharma, there was no occasion for the husband of Smt. Malti Sharma to remit the rent for the months of August and September, 1993 to Smt. Ratna Mahay.

The evidence on record do show that there was complete harmony among the daughters of late Durga Dutt Mahay. In the month of December, 1992 Smt. Ratna Mahay, mother had gone to Indor to reside with the plaintiff and lived there upto June, 1994. In integrum period, there was change in the behaviour and conduct of Smt. Malti Sharma who was in possession of the property in dispute. She stopped paying rent of the first floor to Smt. Vashundhara Sharma and this gave birth to dissatisfaction among the family members. The evidence has come on record that Smt. Vashundhara protested the holding of rent of first floor by Smt. Malti Sharma, to her eldest sister, the plaintiff. The plaintiff being eldest one was managing affairs to the entire satisfaction of all. The letters written by Vashundhara Sharma showing her dissatisfaction to the plaintiff are on record. Smt. Malti Sharma with the evil design in her mind, taking undue advantage the absence of mother from the house, surreptitiously without knowledge of anyone, after about six years of death of the father, filed an application for getting her name mutated before the G.D.A. which was supported by her affidavit. For the first time, she set up the alleged will dated 15th February, 1987 before the G.D.A. and she managed to file alleged joint affidavit of all her other sisters and of her mother and managed to obtain mutation order in her favour. She was in lookout to find a buyer of the property in question. In the meantime, her mother Smt. Ratna Mahay returned to house in question at Ghaziabad in the month of June, 1994 and there she expired on 2nd August, 1994. Taking advantage of the situation and finding it that she alone is in occupation and possession of the property in dispute and all other sisters were residing at different places outside Ghaziabad, sold the property in dispute on 19th September, 1995 to the present appellant. The mutation order dated 16th March, 1993 was kept in secret from her mother and sisters. To facilitate the sale transaction, she also got perpetual lease converted into freehold by depositing freehold charges. It has come in evidence that till the execution of sale deed, Smt. Malti Sharma was residing in the house in question and there survives no dispute was surfaced among the sisters. Smt. Malti Sharma managed the entire show surreptitiously without knowledge of any of her sisters. The mutation proceedings and the proceeding for getting the property in dispute freehold, all were conducted ex parte without any notice to any of them. It is not even the case of the appellant that the G.D.A. had issued any notice to any of the sisters, with regard to mutation proceedings. There is no pleading that the citation in the newspaper as generally required in such matters was issued by the G.D.A. before effecting the mutation in favour of Smt. Malti Sharma.

All these things were in the special knowledge of Smt. Malti Sharma who could explain them but for the reason best known to her, she failed to appear in the suit. The appellant submits that he is not aware of the present whereabouts of Smt. Malti Sharma. The plaintiff submits that since the execution of sale deed, she is missing. Be that as it may, there is sufficient evidence to show that the mutation order was obtained by Smt. Malti Sharma in an ex parte manner. Learned counsel for the respondents rightly submits that the mutation order does not confer any title to the person in whose name property mutated. He has relied upon certain decisions in this regard. It is an acknowledged legal position that even if, mutation has been made in the name of one of the co-sharers by the municipal authorities, the right, title and interest of the other co-sharers in the property in dispute will not be affected in any manner. Reference can be made to Smt. Sawarni v. Smt. Inder Kaur, (1996) 6 SCALE 333 vide para-7.

Now, in the light of above, it is clear that the appellant came to know at least before sale transaction that Durga Dutt Mahay had left seven daughters and a widow. One of the daughters and widow had expired by that time. He also came to know of the details of other daughters of Durga Dutt Mahay on the examination of the alleged joint affidavit filed in connection with the mutation proceedings. In his cross examination, he accepts the position that he never made any inquiry with regard to share of other heirs in the house from any of the sisters of the vendor. Name of the sisters find mentioned even in the alleged affidavit dated 9th February, 1993 which has found to be forged and fabricated document. It is a case where there is absolutely no dispute with regard to the natural heirs and legal representatives of the deceased Durga Dutt Mahay. There was absolutely no reason for non making any inquiry from even anyone of them. The appellant solely relies upon the mutation order which was obtained by Smt. Malti Sharma, fraudulently. It has been found by us that she obtained the mutation order in her favour surreptitiously. The telephone and electricity connection in favour of Smt. Malti Sharma are documents of possession and they have nothing to do with the title to the property in question. Therefore, it cannot be said that the appellant unwittingly purchased the property in dispute. He took a calculated risk and knowingly that there are other co-sharers purchased the property in dispute with his wide open eyes from one of the co-shares.