W WWW-.wa:m mm»: Comm 0? i<ARNAm<.cs HEGH comm' OF KMNATAKA meal};-a Com? m ' u: I :- IN THE ram COURT or KARNATAKA AT Daren THIS THE fmv or OCTOBER..:2C3£}9fl"'-- n BEFORE , u A '. :~coN'aLe MR. JusnCEV~G- A RA'-'.A. No.1i7i'A'1i?12Q§31«"».,V_" f'y BETWEEN: A 1.
Ash: John Divianabhan,
519 tabs R.P. David, ‘ ‘
Aged about 42 yaars, [ _
2. firs. mi. David, %%
win um R,.P.’D°u;vid,i_ g
AM abau%%6?%yeam,A %
Not: ar1:e£V2:-ska; ” V
At R§c§i’Iiag{,”L:Yeaf%:;’aud,
Sakagrs. __ . ” APPELLANTS.
(ay AWs., 3
% H : : l’*1AlJ10TR.A,
mi.
% ‘ awe Fm}: amraumm
eo’m=Lex,
H.127; RQAD
” cox.
A &%’i’m. susam mmnencm,
x .-«DIG LATE 2.9. mm,
RICHLIEU, YEARCAUD,
5Ai.EM.
r’ua\.”.vr’n mwwmv wr £’$.fiW€?§”W’–§%;v°5>’5″i.M MKEM £:;m§m Q? KARNA’F&!(A EHGH CQURT Q? KARNATAKAI-TV
-:2?
3. Dr. THOMAS CHANDY, (AMENDED VIBE
519 Mr. KORA CMNDY, DT. 1S.09.2®5)
men wow 52 was,
No.45, MAGRATH mm,
Bsucmoae-sac 025.
RZSERVED)
RFA FILED UNDER”‘-5E:£.”l’ION’*-.9é-i5)F’,TflE CFC,
AGAINST THE JUDGBlENT._ AND DATED.
31.08.2001 PA$El}” III 05.’ i’39j.41O079/1994 DH THE FILE
OF THE xxvm ADi’3L; _C1′._’IY;_ XJUBGE, BANGALORE,
BISHISSING THE AND
PERMANENT zwuxcnoai. T
11415 AND Rmuvea
AND COMING G”. OF ORDER THIS
DAY, T.3;§% DEi;{i’ER§G THEF’OLLOWING:-
–%gppe’§[ ma! nap:-asenmfivas of
in as. No.1ava79/1954 on ma file 0!
cm: and Sessions Judge, Mayo Hall
“.:AA””VTU:!it. T(cc1~s No.29), wing mrmoa av an
A ‘ «fie mm datand 31.33.2001, whoroin an arm
ha; mama the 511% of em mm for pouassian
% §§’:d»vpa:rnmnent znjuncaon with an anier as no cam.
“\é’§’a§>
(av was. A. nuam A-ss’rs., a:mn,xfiiTT T * 7
sax us. camammoaun, Am, -1′ _ }
“3 3 3”
2. The emanfial facts of em as leading up so
this appal with reforcnm no the msk of the
the trial Court am at l’oEo’m:- V’ L. 4′
2.1 Thu criuinal plaimff ‘:
me Mr. re. sammauumk 6.3;
10.02.1994 were the making for:
dentarwon that «mad 11.03.1977
and an alleged sa:m’=!§me§sa.-a.;’§:5y 19.04.1950
numborgg and mxao
5»: am sub-nogasmr,
amaun and void am not warm
on the forth in me pnasnt;
conaaqu¢;araa:%mI§Lw-arkkpoagcamn in favour of flue plaintifi;
& use phinfiff against an
servants, mutraining them frwn
tsp or my hufldmg or cutting down
A 95 mt ectmiub property; grant of mm fw
pm: af mzoop fram 69.01.1984 ta Hm
fiiing as! as new (za.o2.x9a4) mm an
and mtum mane profia be he detaerminad
“” “W “‘ ‘- WW” V-~’%~.»W_P¥H U?” M~Mwi¥\EAW&Kfl NEG?! COURT 0? KARNATAKA I-HGH COURT OF i(fl.RNATAKA Hififi Cfliffi? $3? i€{fi%.E%.§°’~i.&T&§€A M§£§f%
E;
, W ….V_,…5’……. V. .u–mmnw«mm nawn uuwm: ma” mM§€&\W%%’;f1z?€s& €;:mm’%’ Q?’ KARNATAKA HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA E-‘3;
‘£4 3’
separamiy as mvmgad under ordar xx Rule 1; at the
C.P.C. and far award of mm. This ma: xhwtsh
is described as aii that pace and parcel
aim at! the super wucwm, 1:36″
thereon, being a wrfion
Mama new No.12, eraw, 10″-A, Rioafig
Ashaknagar (shoalay), %p;mg hounded
as per the to than plalnt.
that Mr. Floromo L
Raitg ifif; was raiding at Rent
Howgo -19%}; Nagmah Rmd, macaw:-25,
and mi slw has! executed an
aggwgjaermnt p’:-operty, inclmive at am property
% ji:n«.__ti1a mug an the pm: in favour a! the
1976. The aw comma: was «mum
L. mu; wt of km cam free um and in
ma. an am «am. an mm mm W «-
K « fur her mm hotm propaty m are pmnfiff, wha as
of me agmment, had bandad am the cheque
%% mfe:-rad an as dausa (:3 In cm are agmrmt. The
‘\;?>\.{§3
-:5 @-
defundmt was me holder d I General Fewer of Am:-My
med executed by Mrs. r-21.. max. Ha Imw an
agmmnt far me mad o5.o4.1975%:%%fa:u£k%fay
influcncing and pruwrhing Mr§.mF.L _
by misraproauntaflon and fraud, L
11.03.1977 in respect .9?-£10 sass.»
Apparentiy, an fraud by elm
defendant, he b:~ou¢5e dead man
19.94.1930, .: cansmrable
nxtmt boundary or an
Dncrtpmn of mo
3i!’–‘,:w«VI’i0od dam 11,o3.1977 has
~»V.ws_»aw W ewewamm mam ccrum 0? KARNA”l’Ai<fi E-HGH coum OF KARNATAKA Hm»: ca-am" ¢;::»:a= 2««:¢rx-@*e:%»42sa"ai}¢,$;%%7"fi, é~%§m._-
been cum am: in 52$ an menmn as? aw
pnopart-y_ igévgn snppiernentary dead
rnentionad in the pm»: as
variafion of an proporty an an
would show that Mrs. Bait: and
_ % eoliudad may so bring about mm was
Ehmnfim as wet the mum mm me am
V under the agmerneat of sale daead 05.94.1975.
use ma an and and supplerrentary me are
xsa/%
-: 5 :-
vifiahmdbyfiaudinatmtnchcsflueyareexepuhadin
collation with the defendant so demo: the pIaint.*I._fi’-?. _s.._rvv’ig!’2!:
undw awe agnaamant of salt: dated
dliundant knew an about trhshi
05.04.1976 ommu by Mrs. V
plaintiff.
2.3 It is ~–..§g..}”j§fv;g’phint that it was
learnt that under Gilt
Duds Socfion am.)
of my a§nImon Act, um,
.”t:hs rm’) . In fact. an
…-.mu»-“mam. mwn uwwms ma” 3%..m..i<£§k%.~r:%I'¥fia%fi MECEH COURT 0% i(ARNA?AE(A HEQH COURT OF KARNATAKA Hit.
dafendant was a foreigner and
such pe.r§1t’nesian’4 .Vvvevs;V1’1;$$ca4.§:ssa;?y and awn that way, are gfit
dad: are void. In any intent,
dam! 19.m.19m is not a dud
” ‘B3at mks. um any right he an dofondant. R is
% an: a wading of ma mu: m 9.5.
was an c1.12.19m by Mrs. Ingrid 1.
V _ describing ham:-aa§f as ‘aware! flower of
for Mrs. 1’-*.:.. Ram mmld show am an
..j;
-~ -we_m ur mmmmmm HEGH COi}RY or KARNATAKIII HIGH Cam’: W Knmmwm a~m;u«-é comm” 0? mmarnm MSGH C
s: 7 :-
defemlant and Mrs. Ingrid I Greenwood wane caayspifing
was new other an defraud tha phintifl’ of as ;figE R ‘fi§wing
under the agreernent of sale am 05434. 1&6. %$§’m a1e
truth and sons: of juwu did pri’\?’ai2«naj: x’euVt:’
of hat own free will, sh: axocufiiesj ‘mtifgffsg.
of cab dam: O4.12.19 $i””‘!;onfi.i*rzai§1§…V Am mu
rnaamsra that she Vbagl pfi§;…3ai;earmnt af
sake dated 06.04. piaintiff. Then,
ms. F.L. ag:e.~tLk part of the sale
cansids;g*§§fi_V me dead a sum of
Rs. she cxpmuc: so an
plaiffiziff’ pay was amassed on her
and flx§t
mwwm -« numscv \:aIf’»6|”0V:unFI\’ NIB! ;\J'”il\E’I5″‘\ifil°’0.¥\JW WTEEWFW Qkfiififli 1.,o5?’ §’§;.§~35a§”5″<§;¢€'3§.%aflhWgfi%.
I; 8 2*
2.4 It is further avaz-red in the plaint fight it 3
famaiy set out by Mrs. G:-eerswmd amt she was.r§gs«£§3fng in
Mrs. Raitlfs house over: on O1.i2.1982.
Mrs. Greenwood came to
afonusaid trans-actbns, she aot:’ver:{ai1gf3v;_.’aAh::d
worst. It is further uu§t%%tm% Gafi£3;j”.:!.V,9eaiv§r
Athomay am dam! by Mrs.
!’-‘.L. Raitt wt of h¢:;*«–._zén*4v;: 5! Mr. Peter
Phitip in ordertp engzsrfi in favour of me
phintiff tam cm by Mm.
5.1.. rurt.-nor mm: that it
Phfilp as instrucud by Mrs. EL.
Raitt paid overfier vtin’z§£j’..h::. 6″::§”érmnt at Rs.2,M,?63/-,
wljkh S figs ‘safia par1ca,_V§:’lw;1atS:a plainfifi had made aver the
af’&tt§?:i¢§”‘hpBer and whet-efara, 613 we dud for
ms macaw on o9.o4.ma in favour
TV ‘aha :efi§’rAobtaininn H19 roquirod pcmwsian fmm
‘ Eafik at India. 1: is mum that am am am
am: have Men exacahed in favaur af
“da?;er£ant mly a» aids! are phinfifs right flowing
% me Agmmrsz at saw med 65.04.1976. ‘rm
‘*
§<&RN£R.T§M{2% H%G%'i
-:9;~
peninfiff came to know of the said gift dad _and we
supplementary deed oniy after Mr. Pacer Ph1i!::,a’ § _bt:§inad
Encurnbrance eerflficam on 07.03.
Refit’: ham propmy for
os.o3.ms4. In mm-v. an aarm;¢m°h§¢%;;e:pmm%%%%%
of an: suit animate ahii-wig
Mrs. EL. war, he was g_%_Vsr’§£:’9-:”:e§3f ;p§msion by
dumping mm and in the achwule
property andfie put up building
thereon and said rdicfs.
2.5 Tn: “§¢m; by my aamdan: by
{fling writbeh’ that was mm: mm by we
plainafffs mg: in luv: and on fam. Tha
~ and specumiva in nature and
Tho dofondant in the abaomu owner
A posemoa cw… pm: echodub mum. mo pininfiff
A ‘ no mmmr of mht, Wu 9:” Enmm mm’ mo
darendant derived his we no the suit pmperty
% use mama-M 93!: ems dated 1.1.93′ 1977, which
W vazunm-sly exacutaa by Mrs. EL. me: out of an and
M – ~+_.»¢.m. W mmnmm mm-1 mum” 0? KARNATAKI36 I-HGH coum OF i<ARNfi?s"¥'m(A waszwx c0a3:é%'%":¢%
\,"~x,,«-Q
Wm" WWW v«-wm w i<.A¥~'.NATm<.n wme wsuizv 0? KARNATAKA I-HGH comm or mRNAm<A a-«ma ca-um" W mmmmm Mmm a.
-F; 11 :=
defendant in mspect of 819 suit pmparty and wherefore,
the am: sale am gamma in favour or the psgmgirshas
rm effect in km. Neither Mrs. Raft: new
cf awomoy hoidsr would have
at-uinfiff under the purporm! :1} 5
since the under homltf hair}; ‘éwr
as an that data.
2.6 ms iwrmn mama:
fihd by and an comm flu phint haw been
appifi1r¢n§!§”Breu:fi?h:–ht auspicious circumstances and
in the Mina!’ and Mr. Faber
P¥_;iIi’p,.wlf.§ raiabad to one as-swuer in bunnies
defendant 5? the suit properly. firs. EL.
._ WI fins, kxhmdod and volunurfly acted
5;-onjanaacucutsng and rogimrtng tho nifi am in ruspoct
AA suit pmporty in favour of an cmondant. Tho
iiafendant am; ms: as am, who: had mm ram. n=.:..
mm for flue pm :5 mm we done ampb help iwerviae
to Mrs. EL. Raft: at as am when nobody aka was them be
\3Ma
W v6.!’il&\l”lr’|l§”””U£\J”‘| mawn uuwmfi W §~mm~mmm MEGH comm” OF KARNAYAKA MEGH cam? 05 KARNATAKA :~;z’駫’
-: 12 ;–
lookafber herand even attha mneofharextruma diataw
and ailment and on acmunt: of We sarna and4gnétfl¢f have
and aflfin, ms. EL. Raitt gland dae
favour of tht dcfandmt. Th: c§§fondaz:t~»:§§f§:
murmur of auaamw besides’ for Mgr. fivR£i1f.i §i%- 5
and even an said pow«.’m__§
defendant for the an: L about the
ailegad egrearmnt’§f”::§ké_’: to hem
um emmdma and Mrs. F.L. am
whin an him by tn:
Dlaintifl sank “nu contamts of an
eaid.;VVa9’Vt”_d:iI:=;r*;g;;«Vg_’;V::’3. about war it was nwlr
mended in any event, are plainbvf
had mg» ..¢a% by his oenduct, has amamea /
sgaivekivfift iaeamat, even ‘a’ prwamed he be
éaf.._¢1ti’¢; ‘:§ a§ in chi am in favour of tin
L duf2Iitar11:VI:1”:i;_,v~’.’;§.§§s furfl1orIt\ecrrId am am. F.L. mm; was in
V %%y%%;m;gf oniykéwnmsny for an am m yam em mar death
F? thus, bacoma 3 autism smart of 1:163
V . ‘j @§ §Q§1dank1g I rwnqukhmg Mr foreign cmamhfp. The
positinr: has aka bean summed by the various
‘xk;,,,7%,
WMM wrwrh
-:13 ;«
Gcvamment authoritm and ma ueasstmnts hage ma
dona Hating Mrs. Ram as an Indian
circurmunces, it is not open an the
we an aim: that the am dud fby V
F.l… mm: without oornplving iight
FERA as that parmmion is the
that Mrs. i-IL. Raitt gurus anl)f4_ §;§_i:2§iar$’ a tram:
af fact and also inv has danied five
albgation in axacution oi’
tho agr§gtie;1§§u§’$§::’Q: gm. EL. Raitt in
ravour%kor%%u §ek it as ms-ms that an
pfaiifivfiff of each and wary on: of tin
~«*~«w._m w mmmmm mm: COURT OF KARNATAKA r-new coum or :<ARNAm<A mm»; Cmw mt Kmamwmm mam £2
allagaticns iri V .It 3 fut-fixer mm-ed that
the defignaant am not admit 61: «mm at any
0533,1976 and even if any, was
.ppam,,b.a.m.m by flu gum? obviously undo:
TV “iéndv-..i§aa:°:wt txwuud out of froo veil! of Mrs. F.L.
V A ‘ .-If; ms; the dofcndcnt was gators! potnr
haider of Mrs. Raitt, but; it was only fmn
V V and he was not avatars of fire 411%
éfiraement cf saie dahad 05.04.1976 and any in we
A
lawn a mwumi vww mmamwwmammx Miigéw QQURT OF §{ARMA”¥’AK& HEGH COMM” Q?’ KARNATAKA Hit?!-I
.;14 ;.
prwnt pmcminga, we whndant came to imcfw about
the anagw agmment at sale med O5.o4.192As’V_§u’.§ _Fa_§rour
of the prawn. The pmnear was my
dad and suypinmlntnry dud “Ear _
volunmrily in rmur of an anmaeni anea:.@.:a¢;..a
and the sapplomcntary
defendant are valid and ‘t*!u§_e’ dejfV:an¢1ant and
wherefore, are Sen executed
by Hrs. F.L. Ram: suhaaquant no
mo dang any we on tho
pmnugrr m: :extmo to no aiamzmd.
21% uur:$§g’T%%m§*~=;ag”a:swaacyL of the sue, me stigma!’
6&3 his daughher and wife ware bnaught
% k% 4¥a¢¢§éd%aa%hs :.[g.u rep;-muavas.
,’a.e%y%%:%wng mgard w the pbudltmof an perm
my isms mm framed by animal Courton
& k1e, i1,:9m:
‘%x\-/QJVV.5 .}
’22’
“1. Do Piairsfiffs pmve asst lam Homnoe L.
Rafi agreed as seif fin erstim suit
favour of d%sad R.P. aavid ?
2. Do they mitt pmuatgat Flo:s’u’Irr§§i”_i..?. fi’avit:
cxucuwd as taufind
04.12.1982 am rjucsfvfng “R’s.On§_~v_ §3kh
coneendad ?
3. Are um%jg:2t %aem%;,;.oa.1m and
we suppianwarafiry d.s§ssi,19;.o4.19ao in
favaur’ ‘pf laééitg hit by tho
Emmi E§&¢iiénao Roaulation
Asa, :aws.aeam«a?
4. am «era-musket
docurnanm and bmsacfinm fie
Foreign Exchamaaguatian Act, %:m3 and
they are sxazsd in _ 1 «
5. Gamma! Power
at L am in
% fasr<;r::z5'1;_¢_?v!;f. Pw'u'_F':hflip 3 not am and
.,_ §};a;ns;ir:;g-?"' A' H
5; prove wt a% mum
– %-M’*~,;ijm w mmmrmm Mfifi comm OF KARNATAKA HIGH comer of KARNATAKA Mew: €€3¥,£*§’¢;”E” W ammmszam MEGH a
;5’e::r_::i’:§_sa4;i__”‘ 61¢ enm mm props-ty as
\3Mj$
nwr1:a1&’lWli1l”H\u§”‘¢ risamm %.J’»..3E..m;3 U2?” M;wMm;’¥”5¢%%m a-«ms-é com”: M KARNATAKA may-a comm” or z<AR:¥4iA'£A§<A I-é':'c;':?:'
~: 16 :-
canhended and the arm is binding on fire
defendant ? ”
7. Do plaindffs prow that thus}: an
ho mover past meant gt tf:i”ra§¢u.éaf
R5280/~ par month ?
8. Are piaintiflk ehvtified
pomssbn andinjunctia:i1____?j-.___ ”
9. what mm.~mm%z» %j A
‘rho suit cf4.fi::!¢A %£:,::.=».%r1¢;k%1oo79/woq was
embed %%%% M and o.s.
twidonoo was mzordod.
Piaintifi H92 got heme}? axamined
as W. V3,’; am! slfe “cs:§’r§Imfi}d one wftnem as PW.2 and get
ea 933.j on em ofimr hand, an saga:
“of aerumnmo.1 and defendant Na.2
fits!”— mm mmmw as BWM. and 2
% % A; ‘rm dcfondmt rm the am: not himaif
as 9951.3 am! gmt marlmd Exs.D1 an 077.
_ Mas. City cm: Judge, am: hearing the
‘.”é:$§:uantIons cf flue burned counsei apaaaring for the
K’\§’\./g
-;17:-
parfig and app:-eciafing the aural and documentary
avidanae on record, answered laud: 5103.1, 2,~.Vj«; _iia_ 62¢
affirmativa and Kane Na:.3, 5, 5, 7, 3 in
but so.9 as gm” an fina__i,….¢_t_’d0r_~’ £136:
assmsmd the suit of an orinin§!Api;aj_ix”:#;iff;»._’B_oifjg Aaggmu
by me dbma! of %m§ aw:
rapr&nmt!vm i.e.,;__s¢m arjé: iii}: plains?! –
R.P. David have _ 3. appearing for tm " coma! appurirsg for
rwgmdegi%e¢»g.%1%m£<L%jaau exam waned aprpcarfiwa For
M -…w,x.»;»_w Ur ¥£ARN&TAKA mesa cmjm ms KARNATAKA Harsh comm' OF MRNMAM Hifi'-3%-% cwum" m Kmmmmm mm»: an
rapondent – V " '
appearing for we appellana
suema:c§%d%s:aé'%*aaw%%%%;wm of the was Court am: the gift
and"'fizre s2.@:pbnmnury dud txlcutw in favour of
% mpomm: No.1 Main on 11.m.1977
are valid and net Md is swam. The
. _ Cfiurt, havazg heid fiat no perrniamn was chained by
Ir"-'.£.. Rafi: as required uwdar five prowions of
MM COUEV (JPFKARNAIAKA HIGH €;4pu.x':-'-tar"-imxNA'm&A ' Mum 1-..m»ww W» rwammm-gang-w H':wfi'¢…wuMa ur nnmmfitmnfi nmn-..,…;..,m W N-..\…,–.m..n
~;13;-
FERA, was not justifmd in homing fiat the said gift am
and supplemenmry deed conferrad {me in the
suit property an the defarsdant — n’uponda_:_19:?_:”N5’§’v1.j’:;§’!é$§fieV
Learned wanes! furfim submitfigd _t_:hat’.3
tho supplomsntary dud were -» u
ruwndmt No.1 by ‘ -..f’fas.;d.
mmeprmntafion ma the sflaotantiamd
by the evidanm ‘A thfi Hpiainfifi and
wherefore, dag. trial apprecmed the
oral anq record in an right
firm Court damsumg we
suiépf -to he at acids and in flow of
the fafl fifuatf has bun axacueed in favour of
” erigifii ~ 09.G4.19m by are mwer of
affirs. EL. mu, fiseplaintiff has bamma
. ftru% sun sehcmio pmpunty and whervefom, an
M Ma: ho hum docrood mans: ownpsamfr as
g n Vjasgugbi for.
5. Learned comma! for am %da:-st No.1
arguadin sappastoffltejudwttmddaana pafiedby
\5=V-3*
WW * MWwIw- W-W ImmmNMEM%w4%” ‘M%EW”¥”‘fi€.?U5§T’UF’K3§RN)QTfi’3{Wh” HRS” COUR1″‘©’F KARNATAKIHWHIHIGH COURT”0F KARNAEFXKI-\ fiifirzm MUU’:’H ur mmmwmwmwa u a
.19 ..
the trim court and submimd that the eonmntion that ti-an
gift deed claw 11.03.1977 and supplementary amiljdam
19.04.1999 have been obtained by me.:..aarén%;.:a*;:~:.%j+
mponmc No.1 by fraud, commimand
has not been summatiatnd ting! who
provisions of Section 31(1)’ at u:§=:=EaA va§s£i!§fv4nqt..’1miid§f»
the saw gift am and and the
same am: not ‘in favour of the
defendant – rasponeeani mm by 613 trial
Court. .m…..a mt ms gifi: dud
dam a..%%..ppum.-m and. dams
-by Mrs. F.L. mu: prior so me
%-::~f’fi*:4:a deed in {want of the aminnl
plgihfifi ‘of ateorney holder of Mrs. F.L. Raitt
. j o9.:34.%%im3.
Having regard to an cantaamons urged by the
* eounal appoafmg for the atria. an points mat
34% far deaamimfior: in 1318 apm! are:
\;:a,.V}§
‘I4|F’II’ …. ammx\IvMlMi\M mwvm ‘¢..’.%m;..m! OF” éfififiwfifffiaééglii MEQH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA H39!’-i
-:20 ;~
1. whefiw the finding of the fiat
court me me pm-sms have mad eoprpgvg
that the gut and saw 11.03.1a?’?’ :a§ig! “‘«
mpnmmry dad was 19.0-mxvaeal :
void and not binding upo{1»Vti:om,–“bw£éije.fi3:V’by V
than provision of Foroignii’ 3
Act, 1973,, and man or%«g¢eau§san, rrg£.«a*%
msmprmntatiaa, V cam air
interferancein ms ” J
2. whethav’ fl’.ie ‘7§£t=;?1f$’lg__. (“r~’.AA_’;€5 i£. ma: court
that &§«a__pIaii,’ifi5f”fe:l’;anV_i§A«.fnjor_l: be rotiefu
51: :éui§_ ;jn;a;”‘th:i””gi4’t and dahod
1£.n3;39%77%% a5a%%%§upgb:mnaw dud mud
favour of the
defe§i£é:§t.”u{§m Md prior in Mm: of am
a;g1’& in suit of ma phinfiffs, is
_ _ jaififiwvaf intarfamnce in am apmai?
% 3.% the juagumont am mu court was for zaurrwmu in ap.§ o§ai'? " , 4; 4.: «mg me?
than shave pom tar dmmmmn as lwawsr
xw»
X»”W|mI’ WuM’M’¢,V .,.,y,,3
m’WMmm-«~ rmm a..w_m up :<mm'rAm mam Comm 0:: KARNATAKA 1-non coum OF mnmmm e«%§e:::i2»§ cmm U?' wimmmmm mu;-1 u.
-: 21 ev-
mint No.3. : Tha finding cf am triat Court flint five
ptaintiffs hava failed an prove that the gift
11.93.1977 and suppluamantary am datsed me
void and not binding upon fljgm, byfttae.
provisions of the Fenian
and rwult of counties, aha?
justified and the arm syfffif’ éfny error or
ikgality as no call apfifil.
Point No,2:[% : ranging; :;t;e’ :rm Court um; um
psainusrs any sought for in the suit as
thc’.jgift__ and aupphmonhary dud
in fweur of ma ddendant era
gggifid and” ‘of tiara and in dkmhsing the suit of
is j%d and the same dog not
, omar arr inequity as no tag for interfumnca
in cm; Agsxas.
A’ ‘flint 315,3 : The judgermnt and decree pasmd by the
triat Court is justifleci and Eve sarrue dam {sat suffer from
“\;»'”a Va “~.J%.M’\H W? E’%.§&¥’€§’*£i«M§~hEX.f-% HEWM LKJUKW LN” KANNAQAKA Hfbfl ¥.,..€.}{..H€¥ Q)!’ KHKNMIMKH NEW” ‘R
-: 22 ;«
any error or ifmality as to can fer intnrference in this _
appezu.
Point No.4 : in per fl10finl|0*I’dIffQ![I’.h_I ‘[1: u
7. mnn_.Lm._s coflfléemd
together since flaeyjra “ha avoid
a. for me Appolanes
has taken of PWs.1 and 2 and
tfga of utfev Exs.P1 to P33 as am the
3 61¢ mum-:3 at’ the dacurnanm
rsfonlnm to the origins! f’Ot50f’d§,
VV’.- T §éizich ham mum fmm flu me: com. Leamod
‘ 13;: won an falbwing mbions :
sf ~VA1s 1959 mmnm amass:-s 54? (93) (pm:
Virayya Vs. aoppabapudi Suhhn Rat: and Anofimr)
umwww a-wwm fi…u.ugu up g4;AgNp,”m_Kp WQH CQURT OF KARNATAKA HiGH COUR? OF §<ARNA"¥'aM€fis mam LLUMM U?' 3%M2'{{§"*§.M.I§~*a¥%.H mun am
-:23 ;-
ii. AIR 1994 SUPREME COURT mo (Ranusaggr Power
Co. Lhd.,Vs.Genera£mctficCa.,) V _ V
iii. AIR 1994 ALLA1% 298 (FULL sesi£::<)%k%%F %(¥S:¢aaasn
Kumar and owners Vs. H D%ji:rict i3_§s:d{fiin,"-
and mm )
iv. AIR was SUPREM’£:’__’G;9Ul§T.
Cormrstinn oflndfi )
v. AIR 1937 (ms. wagh and
Others 1′.-#35 Jay.
appofiants “mm
ttuu£,V1Ana:1§§$§’fi:£:fa_I §g jeéfmrmmbn uncsur seem 31(1) or
the any we and wants! matter the
“&aed.Va”nd i1up §£e;rsenary deed invalid and void ab
Aer: the war hand, luarnod manual aafilarinfl
= :f9r rcépemonz No.1 has um am an daemon of ms
“tidurt in ma zm an 2245 (as:-my ma Labour Weifare
House sums; ca-ope:-afiva society mm vs. 9.3.
Mmflwunjaya At-adhya) in support of I13 eaneanfion mat
\5:§/$5..
-; 25 :-
Commimon wwid cheat-ly show that Mrs. Fioreme L. Raftt
was a Briwh Cutter: and she was not 3 :-esmnf §f~.1ndh.
scrutiny o! are nnauarial on racard would .16′”e:a t
than fact mat the gm and was gqgucubt-i;i”i3§?f _
L. Ram in favour or use dcfiyndgmifiv6r:..1.’1A1:;fi3;3;*3fF.:,find”v V
tmmafbar, supplumnurjv -bias V
favaur af the dafendnnt dhputad.
However, it is the ‘fiat the said
gift deed and does not
confnr any tiflu gzaéfi «Nation of
the provisions Further, it is
contmm mu: tn; am am has been
abtamed b3r1 ‘gh’e my of hand and by
exercising the arm does not
cg} respect of tha suit prmrty.
Ha§ia§ mark! on menu, it is exam that
fizcficutiéa of.._i:fiar.}A dud as aim the supphmmeary dud
% A’ 1.1.ou3.3i977 am! 19.94.1990 rcspoctivoiy as par
thud D25 rapecltvely 3 met dhpum and
V _ harder: it rmvy awn H19 pkiwfii has prawn
the said an’! em and supgziemeneary am (5115 not
-mm »_.»..,_W. W AAKNAMKA :-mm comm 0? KARNATAKA 1-um-z Comm 0? mmmmm W§€§Ew% CETMR’? W KMMMMEE mew
men Comm ¥<flfi?wEfi&"¥"fii¥{&"2 mm-§ c®W§::m::
‘§ F”
12. r-vw.1 – Ingrfi Greenwm has neimrabed awe
avemvena mag én the plain: and has got
so 933. B: k aikitaé in the cra$~emminafi§%”$f.’_?§§§3.-Ltiagt
em swans tanking mar ma-gas an »f3:’:;:t;:’ ;_§_AiaiijT;t¥i’I’ 33;,
– . V F:-am am am of M mt
– remember the acaémjic plaintiff.
She dew rial: knofl mm: was
consattina flht} was Mr
!’amer’s Q13 facts «mm an
flu Iabxamimtion of PWJ as
aka the examination-in-chief that
apart _ ti’.i1at was coat-cinn and fraud
in obtaining the gifi deed and
Mm. EL. Raitt, fin particuiars of
saiid-fra:;’d’Jwcmion is not spoken to by PW.1 in her
an nnmvmumnfl HIGH COURT OF KARNfiT§Kfi’l
_ A _ ‘ z widows of PR2 «- Anthony D1 Costa aim
Vfiatffsuhsmnfiee are wficulars about the fraud and
A % exercised by an fiefendant for oauznsag five gift
and supplermnmry am fram Mrs. EL. Ram.
=
Exs.D1 to D8 are in are handvfrtfing
and they am signod by an pig mg’ w._3_. s;§*’9’2, =_ j
Wcmm HEQH ccum ow xARNA?AkE{ r;§¢:1C}”‘€: wC>uRr 05 :<AaNAm7<A' ':¥'«:7:<;'.;f7's5-0-5!”\wJf””¢ .-.vm.;M'”p’ *wM.@”€J%’r”<H' %,.:W'" Kfiwi
A titk in favour of the dufonda_n.L__ Sc}H" "4:{'_jV3iE1);_of,
Foreign Exchange Rmulatien :i'_915%4,« J
-: 28 @-
Thamlfiru, the piainfiffi am mainly relying gmtz the
pmisions at section 31(1) M the FERA for coxgmfizfifig’ that
am git! dws and supplanmenmry deed
an “afiqI§3IfiOl;
lowing pmparly in
India :« (1) M6 i3I’.;n§i: a citizen of
India ¢jfid__ na;étirnfii§sr:j:r”A[tja§r:aa9r’v:t’§?ien a banking
undur any
Iaiifi » sfigli, want with tho
p;g§;a3us4V’:£§:iné’raAI’-qr permifiion of the
or how at transfer or
‘difipou mortgage, base, gin,
_ _ ar ‘ cane:-was any imrmvabse
~ E in India:
{A that nothing in am wbmtior:
.’ ‘afiau to the acqukifion er transfer of any
suchvirzxrzrovnbb flroflflftif by way of town for a
AA not-excaedirtg We years. ”
13. 1:: via: or an above said mam mt Mrs. tax.
was mi: 3 Citizen of India and in View of the admitmi
-:30;-»
Limited’: case (ILR 20% KM! 2245), thk has
owe:-ved in paras 27 and 28 as fallows; T’ T”
*2?. Tnmrom, the me gm 3;’. 5; ‘
stzmmarized as under:-
A was mama: 1; .¢:m, %%&h:’:hk’ ks
enfomeabb by tha
puma to we “~–.§f agn-mutant is
cm, which dog; cf law,
and any we!
or am.’ parlamu, it is
a :rsa,1t3i’t§i;i5zgr’Vira¢_r::.’4iv.ét,._ ‘ft: Esfiiot as conmct at all.
nut! and void wfinout
Qéééh ar cantimahbn has no
ve:l§1’e,_a57£_£$z1::a~*:.§::a’j2:§1ot aontinue a nuliity. If a
satuhe th&-‘I: a aenuact
mum-éfta ttséisreavbfians of Afliéistattsbe wank!
be voaa;%;:%aeJnc%caa&ac~:j:=an m of am, a is
ab agnuxmnt is
un¥?{f§r¢Hbh””én kw.-.5″‘In botumn mm two
iios fin widablc
4’ luv: it use and aiso
j, a cnnumt. It can also he
-«fiat means: of mm defict in M
five aptiare of tha party he ate
W_;.w W mmmAzm mm-2 comm or KARNAYAKA Him £:e.:::wa”r O5′ mwnmm wmw Comm” 0? mammm mm»:
agfiesitrxazst, it b aunts no so cmanw or at
Q»;*_,4/5?’;
W. « mm a mwwmi wr u\MKNIMA3€..A MIGH COUR? OF KARNATAKA t-HGH CCU?!” OF KARNATAKA HEGH
‘F: Q’
awe. In other words, a voidabie agrearmntfi
arm which 3 vale! arr valid at am slutkm ca!
at the perms. However, it is vaIid,;”‘fii£–.’.i§.’_,j:i;}” _
dacaam void by a compcblnt Cour1;§t”- Mina T & %
manna” known no law. j’ié j2V
nuflity or not: net. It is §mici_”a.§id
avoided. It mqulrosabo §sidu.T. “7 H
23. un,:m }:£=4T –.§t:a_!;uaa ‘apesifically
provides an we
pmvkions of a’iia tJié!:_–l:$’e void, the
eonujm.&k%gu-ouszs mm%am:ng batman the
“¢o§_.;.l;_§ between an
~ 1′ §fiq,:?qucstbn whatnot a
9-Iif!:ic*;::3;llv:tjV_:’A’!:1″:is*:§ ‘~«§’VIV§ pmhlbiud by the steam
irf dopand upon the true
contact. Om has to lmow
” tine :I*sa§f”d isti§f:ction between the word ‘axcem
§ % ‘anfl1arf&’6r ‘wholly wiflwout jurwction or
an as “eonmzhing mega: which is
by law’ and ‘oxorcising jut-Esdiction
§rmms:r. mean things are submmauy
‘ ._t:§’iffurant. mm mamuon is mum with any
ifiegality and mrmqssanfly tha wntract E net
amides, Hm fik under five saw contract
plumes. If we amt: of me agneamenrt 3 mt
shown to be ilwai, flame $ nu immdirnant an
art enfweement of flu said agrwmant. The
Rig?)
‘3 E’
mm’: (1) ofsection 31. mfion 63 waning»:
provabn awarding cnnflscatéon of
pmpaertiw but it dues net contain any
for confscatios if than is off than” ._
provisions of S35-iI¢U§?fi””(1._1 31:.
Thmrorc. the pmaerw%%T 2 pm-ham %”mf’
conmwcntion of su$:–.s_ncflda_ (1_’3 of. ‘%
3 also mt liable i:a:”x:onf£scai:Eio’iz.:.V-I “I31
ci!”CUh’B&n635.:, it caasifit hetld”-fl:a’:l: the
plainfiflk arav mtii ‘fiaffibiain pcssassmn
of the propertyyfi for h we
.nmu»W.~.~ A
It am by me luarmld
ccru§%9fa¥– tfiat in name of those dacisms,
it hasé Ehat any mnacuon, which is in
afVl’fiw a;, _9;fr:.:visb:2s of Sxtion 31(1) of we I-“ERA
transacwn void and would not aanfnr
finaiag of um um: com am: am
% ymtiéna provisions or Socfion 31(1) of an FEM by
% ‘ =a;..%am before swam the gift «me: aw
£97? and supphmenary am daad 19.a4.:1.m in
of the defendant, which an impugned in the wk,
3 {Vania not mnder the transaction void and would not afiect
‘ KS’:/J’;
0? EU3.flNAT»siKm mam comm or §{AR!\’!’g”}XKA mew
‘f?°.*-“fin: ur KAKNAIAKA H363’! COURY OF KARNATAKP2 HEGH C(3?€.§%?%”§?
-; 34 ;~
xmfing of the we in awe defendant, is justified. B:_£s clear
on re-appmciafion of the evidence adduoad
that the coneenfion that the gift dead
am sxacutad in favuur of my
fraud and by numbing m.m.nam.
not proved by Em pfaint:if|’f{a!s» iflémr
mum before m__u-m_eggs:-,%%%A%.%%mving%m§am an the
aware said maharm gm m-appruiaflon
of the ev¥4er}§t:a_ before the ma
Court t4;atj””‘_d§;£§:fl;:a*?,§’§ approciahad than on:
by tho partits boforo
it and has Real, 2 and 4 in that
affirrnama ant!’ 6, 7 and B in the nwative
vgw hag»: phainfifis have mm m prove
.t!1zr___t t!; 1’i& Em supplemenary deed exewted
‘by 5§I favour of ma defendant are void and
_ piainfifi’ and does not cmfar any we on
A In View of that fact that the wk dud kt
ofigimal gamut-A’! was executed by Mr. Paar
‘ general power or! amrney hmr of am. EL.
an o9.m.19m i.e., snhsequant tn emcutien of the
\;f~wf*»
-uwmirmatrfl’ wsww xmwwnl ur” KANNATAKA HEGH COURT 0% KARNATAKA HIGH CQUQT 0? §(ARMfia¥’A%(A !~%§{3M
~: 35 :~=
gift dad data 11.83.1977 and supplernentary dcsgi emu
19.9-mxaao, use trial! court has fightiy new :§;azk§ii:§y;ésn¢or
had no fifia to wave}; any we thmugfé:_f:’u:§:V’:§§5w¥é§f i.”:’.’..’_
atlxarnay holdnr by way of sa:£¢”6~u-at} 1983;
mruzar, em tria! Court rm mhm%mmgt m% gmnm %
cannot take advantage dalfiié
05.04.1975, which nammrm Err rasksur of the
original phintiff am rightly held
mat 61¢ the Transfer of
Property A.§::, as Specific Roiiuf Act,
are piainfiffs have mt swam
for 9f the agrlmmnt of my dam:
€15.04; .:afi d. reliw upon five sala dead dataad
” it is clear mat the judgement
M by use Erin! Court dismissing me 533% of
and don nut suffor from any mar
j 1 fir .3} to cut! for Eamfomnea in ma appul.
” A I ansamr Eh: puma for doborminafion and
é ‘ ‘_ _ foilawing Omar: –
\v§,K/3;
RGH COURT 0?’ KARNAT’Al<fi HIGH CCfi,.?'3§?'3" OF KARNflf§"A%{fi. Wiéfi COME? 0!" KARNATAKK 'HIGH
'-.'V–nu was l\HK¥VAIAKA H
"5 1*
The Regular fix-st Appeal is dismkaw-.– The
judgement and dame passed by tha
City Civil Judge, myohau Unit, aangaiou-e;f:(cc§1}%;; 29) :g
Suit Na. 10079/2004 dated %31.aa.2flm. ijiérgfiifazirzgg um 1
suit of the plainfifis E ccnfimiid, i;zf¢£§r~ u"s–.ba
costs in this appoal.
3335