Civil Revision No. 6451 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 6451 of 2011 Date of decision:-20.10.2011 Puran Chand ...Petitioner Versus Devi Ram and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present:- Mr. A.N. Saini, Advocate for the petitioner. RITU BAHRI J. Challenge is to the order dated 28.9.2011 (Annexure P-1) whereby the Additional District Judge, Palwal has dismissed the appeal filed against the order dated 26.9.2011 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Palwal, whereby the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. The appellant-plaintiff is a co-sharer in the land detailed in para 1 of the plaint. He alongwith other co-sharers including defendant No.1 agreed to sell the land to defendant No.2. A sale deed was executed on 06.10.2008. Defendant No.2 agreed to make the payment of sale consideration by cheques through defendant No.3. The plaintiff was informed that the sale deed has been registered in favour of defendant No.2 and the payment of cheques has been given to defendant No.1. Subsequently, he came to know that another sale deed dated 13.10.2008 has been prepared by defendants in collusion with each other Civil Revision No. 6451 of 2011 -2- in order to grab the sale consideration of the share of plaintiff. A general power of attorney dated 13.10.2008 executed by the plaintiff in favour of defendant No.1 and the sale deed dated 13.10.2008 was executed on the basis of this power of attorney. The case of the defendant is that the sale deed dated 06.10.2008 could not be executed as one of the co-sharer Smt. Dayawati did not turned up to execute the sale deed. Thereafter, they all went to Sub Registrar, Palwal on 13.10.2008 and came to know that the plaintiff had executed general power of attorney in favour of defendant No.1. This general power of attorney was registered in the office of Sub Registrar on the same day. Defendant No.1 on behalf of plaintiff being his General Power of Attorney signed the sale deed. The plaintiff filed an application for ad interim injunction directing defendant No.1 to make the payment of amount received by him and restraining the defendant Nos.2 and 3 for alienating the suit land till the decision of the suit. The trial Court has dismissed the application and the Appellate Court after observing that the plaintiff has concealed the material facts from the Court, dismissed the appeal. The plaintiff had stated that he had agreed to sell his share of the suit land to defendant No.1 about 3-4 years ago. The plaintiff had stated that he agreed to sell the share of suit land to defendant No.1 about 3-4 years ago about Rs.50,00,000/- per acre and received earnest money of Rs.10,000/-. He had orally agreed to sell his land to defendant No.2. This fact is not stated in the plaint and the plaintiff has concealed this fact by not stating it in the plaint. The plaintiff has challenged the general power of attorney executed in favour of defendant No.1 on 13.10.2008 being forged. The Appellate Court has not accepted the version of the plaintiff. The aforesaid General Power of Attorney is registered in the office of Sub Registrar, the photographs of the plaintiff and witnesses taken with the help of computer Civil Revision No. 6451 of 2011 -3- on the back page of the general power of attorney are also there. In view of the above facts, the General Power of Attorney executed on 13.10.2008 is not a forged document. The sale deed dated 06.10.2008 could not be registered as one of the co-sharer Smt. Dayawati did not turned up to execute the sale deed. The General Power of Attorney executed in favour of defendant No.1 on 30.10.2008 was registered in the office of Sub Registrar bears the thumb impressions of the plaintiff. The plaintiff has been declined the relief of ad-interim injunction vide order dated 28.09.2011. This order does not suffer from any infirmity and calls for no interference at this stage. Dismissed. October 20, 2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Vijay Asija JUDGE