received on -26/08/2008 registered on 30/08/2008 decided on – 14 ...

10
Plaintiff was also residing in the same area. It reveals that the
ancestral house of the defendant no.l was fallen to the share of his
brother and now no immovable property is standing in his name at
Partur. It further reveals that defendant no.l is dealing in a business
of photography and now settled at Hyderabad. It further reveals that
since last 25 years, plaintiff was looking after the defendant no.l's
land. In fact it was being cultivated by the brother of the defendant
no.l and plaintiff was just assisting him. It seems that relations
between the plaintiff and defendant no.l, were cordial. He has
denied that as and when defendant no.l used to visit Partur, he used
to stay at his home. He has stated since 06/08/2008, his relations are
strained with the defendant no.l. He has specifically stated that on
06/08/2008, defendant no.l came at Partur, but did not visited him.
He has specifically deneid that even on 06/08/2008, defendant no.l
had stayed at his house and executed registered sale deed of the suit
land in favour of the defendants no. 2 and 3. He has stated that
necessary stamp for agreement to sale was purchased by one Hamid
Bin Chaus, who is his friend and deals in a ploting business. He has
denied that agreement to sale (exh.41) is a fabricated document. It
reveals that agreement to sale (exh.41) is in his own handwriting
and was prepared at his own house. He has stated that after the
agreement to sale, he did not published any public notice in daily
newspaper, disclosing that he had entered into an agreement to sale
with the defendant no.l, regarding the land Gat no. 154. He has
specifically admitted that he did not request the revenue authority to
mutate his name in the cultivation column, on the basis an
agreement to sale. He claims that after 4 days, he learnt about the
registered sale deed in favour of defendants no. 2 and 3, through the