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

18
amount of rs. 6,08,000/- from the defendants no. 2 and 3 and now
saying that the sale deed is null and void. Plaintiff claims that he is
ready and willing to perform his part of contract. But in such cases,
readyness and willingness of the plaintiff has no relevance. Plaintiff
claims that he is in possession over the suit land. Defendants no. 2
and 3 are also claiming that they are in possession over the suit land.
22 Defendant no.2 Santosh Kale filed his
affidavit of examination in chief at exh. 52 and deposed in terms of
his written statement of defence. He was subjected to the detailed
cross examination He has stated that first time, he has purchased
the land for ploting purpose. He has admitted that there are cross
complaints between the plaintiff and him.In his cross examination
he has stated that he is saying that an agreement to sale is
false,because, he had purchased the suit land through the plaintiff
himself. He has furtehr stated that on the very same date, he had
<strong>received</strong> the possession from the defendant no.l. His further cross
examination discloses that after the negotiation, he did not publish
any public notice in daily newspaper. He has denied that he had
knowledge of an agreement to sale between the plaintiff and
defendant no.l.
23 Kailash Gadge ( D W 2) is a witness of the sale deed in
favour of the defendants no. 2 and 3. He has filed his affidavit of
examination in chief at exh. 55 and deposed that he knew the
plaintiff and defendant no.l since long. He has specifically deposed
that plaintiff is a maternal uncle of the defendant no.l. He went on