A SUIT FOR CANCELLATION OF INSTRUMENT [CD1]
IN THE COURT OF THE
CIVIL JUDGE, SENIOR DIVISION, PUNE
AT PUNE
Shri
__. R__. A__. G __., ) age 43 years, occupation - service, ) resident of 222
Budhwar Peth, ) PUNE 411 002. )
Versus
1.
Shri ___ A ___ J ___ N __.,
) age 76 years, occupation - service, )
2.
Shri D A N , )
age 55 years, occupation - service, )
3.
. Shri ___ V ___ A ___ G __, )
age 42 years, occupation - agriculture, )
4. Smt. ___ G ___ V
___ G_, ) age 35 years, occupation - agriculture, ) all residents of Alandi,
Taluka Khed, )
District Pune. )
Civil Suit No.
__/200_
Plaintiff Defendants
A SUIT FOR
CANCELLATION OF THE INSTRUMENT [CD2]
The plaintiff
abovenamed submits this plaint, praying to state as follows :
1.
Description
of Property : All that pieces and
parcels of land situate within the
Registration Division
& District Pune, Sub-Division & Taluka Khed, within the local limits of
the Pune Zilla Parishad, revenue village Alandi, bearing S. Nos. 999 and 1000,
totally admeasuring 12 hectares or thereabouts.
2.
The
Pedigree : That the pedigree is as
follows :
That the defendant
No. 1 is the father of the plaintiff and the defendant Nos. 2 and 3, while the
defendant No. 2 and the plaintiff are the real brothers and the defendant No. 3
is their sister, while the defendant No. 4 is the husband of the defendant No.
3 and the son-in-law
of the defendant No. 1.
3.
That the properties
described in para 1 above along with
other properties were and are ancestral properties of the Hindu joint family
consisting of the plaintiff and the defendant Nos. 1 and. The defendant No. 1
has two sons, namely the present plaintiff and the defendant No. 2, and three
daughters, namely Smt. MNJ, Smt. PMM and Smt. the defendant No. 3.
4.
That the daughters are
married long back, and they are not dependent on the family, nor are they the
members of the family.
5.
That the defendant No. 1 is
an old man deriving a large income from the
family properties and he does not have
any need for any additional money.
The defendant No. 2 is a teacher and earning sufficiently for his own
maintenance.
6.
That, however,
the defendants
unnecessarily developed enmity towards the plaintiff.
7.
That taking the benefit of
the fact that since the plaintiff is in the employment of the Government of
Maharashtra working as a Deputy Engineer, he is required to stay away from the
village, and he is not in a position to restrict and control the dayto-day acts
of the defendants, the defendant No. 1, at the instigation of the defendant
Nos. 2, 3 and 4, started planning the things in such a manner that the
plaintiff should be deprived of his legitimate share in the family properties.
8.
That as a part and parcel of
their plan, long back in 1990, the defendant No. 1 sold the property bearing
Survey Nos. 999 and 1000 totally
admeasuring 12 Hectares.
Though there was no
legal necessity or the benefit of estate. This transaction itself was
illegal and invalid, too. However, when
the plaintiff made enquiries with the defendants, they promised that this area
would be adjusted against the shares of the defendant Nos. 1 and 2.
However, the second step of the
said scheme was taken by the defendant No. 1 on
when the defendant No. 1 sold the suit lands to the defendant
No. 3, on ___________
, for a sum of Rs. 25,000/-, and the said sale-deed is registered with the
office of the Sub-Registrar, Rajgurunagar, at Sr. No. 555, and a xeroxed copy
of the Index thereof is annexed.
9.
That it is the contention of
this plaintiff that the said lands are rich in quality and fertile, and the
market price of the land would not be
less than Rs. Besides, after taking into account the value
of the two wells and the trees therein, the total value of the said properties
would be more than Rs.
2,00,000/-.
10.
That from the said
transaction, it is evident that the amount of Rs. 25,000/- shown on the
sale-deed appears to be a concocted thing, and it must be just to put up a show
of the sale, while, in fact, just to defeat the right of the plaintiff. The property has been assigned by the
defendant No. 1, at the instigation of the defendant No. 2. to his son-in-law
and daughter, and, thus, the said transaction is fraudulent and null and
void. However, even if the Hon'ble Court
were to the conclusion that the transaction is valid, it cannot have the effect
of conveying the plaintiffs l/3rd undivided interest in the said properties.
11.
That the said transaction,
dated _______ However, the plaintiff learnt about it only on or
about____________________________ and then, he made personal enquiries on However, they gave false replies, and hence,
this suit.
12.
That the cause of action for
this suit first arose on , when the sale-deed came to be executed, and hence,
the suit filed today is well within the time.
13.
That the property is situate
as well as the parties reside within the local limits of the jurisdiction of
this court, and hence, this Hon'ble Court has jurisdiction to try and decide
this suit.
14.
That the suit is valued for
the properties and jurisdiction and the amount against the consideration of Rs.
2,00,000/-, and the proper court-fee is paid herewith. In addition to the same,
for the relief and declaration, a further court-fee of Rs. 300/- is paid
herewith.
15.
That the plaintiff,
therefore, prays that -
(A) It be decided
that the sale-deed, dated _______________ , registered with the office of the
Sub-Registrar, Khed, at Sr. No. 555, is null and void and inoperative, and the
same be called for and cancelled;
(B)The plaintiff
alternatively prays that, if the Hon'ble Court comes to the conclusion that the
sale-deed is not void, the plaintiff claims that it be declared that the said
sale-deed is not binding on the plaintiffs 1 /3rd share in the said properties;
(C)The plaintiff be
paid his costs from the defendants; and Any other orders in the interest of
justice be kindly passed.
Pune, Sd/-
RAG
PLAINTIFF
Dated : ____
Sd/-xXX
ADVOCATE FOR
PLAINTIFF
VERIFICATION [CD3]
I,
Shri RAG, the present plaintiff, doe hereby
state on solemn affirmation that the contents of this plaint in paras 1 to 15
are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, so I have signed
hereunder.
Sd/-
RAG PLAINTIFF
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.