ADMISSION OF SECOND APPEAL IN HC

The Defendants/Appellants (my father, my uncle and I) entered into possession of the suit property through an unregistered Agreement for Sale executed in our favour in the year 1996 by the original owner/vendor. The suit property had originally been acquired by the said vendor through a registered conveyance several years earlier. Subsequently, the concerned Government authority allotted/transferred the same property jointly in favour of the vendor and his brother through an official deed. However, the vendor remained the sole and exclusive possessor and cultivator of the property. According to the understanding and conduct of the parties, the inclusion of the brother’s name in the allotment/transfer document was unintended and did not reflect the actual possession and enjoyment of the property. In the year 1996, the vendor approached my father and uncle with the intention of transferring the property. As there existed a statutory restriction on transfer of the allotted land during the relevant period, a registered sale deed could not immediately be executed. Therefore, the vendor executed an unregistered Agreement for Sale after receiving full consideration and delivered possession of the property. At the time of the transaction, the vendor’s brother acknowledged that inclusion of his name in the earlier deed was erroneous and further stated that the property should belong solely to the vendor. For that purpose, he executed a written declaration on stamp paper before witnesses expressing that he had no claim, right, title or interest over the suit property. Thereafter, the vendor permanently shifted to another district after disposing of his other properties and acquired a separate residential property there. Following the transaction, my father and uncle continued in open, peaceful and uninterrupted possession of the suit property. Mutation was obtained on the basis of physical possession, and all applicable revenue and taxes were regularly paid. The nature of the land was accordingly reflected in the revenue records. During this entire period, neither the vendor nor his brother raised any objection. Subsequently, agricultural development and cultivation activities were undertaken on the land. After many years, the vendor returned to the locality after disposing of his property elsewhere and acquired another property in the same locality. Thereafter, the vendor instituted a partition suit against his brother and against us. Owing to inadequate legal representation, illiteracy of the family members concerned and failure to produce material documents including the Agreement for Sale, our defence could not be properly presented before the Trial Court, and judgment was passed against us. The First Appellate Court affirmed the judgment primarily due to insufficiency of evidence and because certain relevant documents had not been produced before the Trial Court. No proceeding for specific performance had been instituted at the relevant time due to legal advice then received. Subsequently, a Second Appeal was preferred before the Hon’ble High Court, which remains pending and has not yet been admitted. Later, a separate Title Suit seeking declaration and injunction under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act was instituted against the concerned parties. Meanwhile, certified copies of material registered documents were obtained, which had not previously been available or within our knowledge despite reasonable efforts. During subsequent proceedings, the brother of the vendor denied the earlier acknowledgment and disputed the previous understanding. The newly obtained documents together with the previously unproduced Agreement for Sale are material and necessary for complete and effective adjudication of the dispute and are intended to be produced in accordance with law before the competent court. NOW HOW WE ADMIT THE SECOND APPEAL IN HIGH COURT FOR STAYING THE EXECUTION & HOW WE WILL SUBMIT THE UNPRODUCED AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND NEWLY DISCOVERED SALE DEED WHICH IS SUPRESSED BY THE VENDOR.