Smt. Kamla Shukla vs Laxmikant Sharma
2022 Latest Caselaw 14454 MP

                                                      1

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

                                                AT GWALIOR
                                                  BEFORE
                                HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
                                        ON THE 9th OF NOVEMBER, 2022

                                         FIRST APPEAL No. 200 of 2013

                                 Between:-
                                  SMT. KAMLA SHUKLA W/O SHRI
                                  JAGDISH SHUKLA, AGED ABOUT 50
                                  YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE
                                  MAHAL COLONY, SHIVPURI (MADHYA
                                  PRADESH)
                                                                  .....APPELLANT
                                 (BY SHRI N.K.GUPTA- SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH SHRI
                                 S.D.S.BHADAURIA -ADVOCATE)
                                 AND
                                  LAXMIKANT SHARMA (DEAD) TH.
                                  L.RS.
                           1.   1(1) NARENDRA KUMAR SHAMA S/O
                                LATE LAXMIKANT SHARMA AGED 37
                                YEARS, R/O 143/12 RAJESHWARI ROAD,
                                SHIVPURI, DISTT. SHIVPURI.
                                SMT. SHANTIDEVI SHARMA W/O LATE
                                LAXMIKANT SHARMA AGED 67 YEARS,
                           1(2)
                                R/O   143/12   RAJESHWARI    ROAD,
                                SHIVPURI, DISTT. SHIVPURI.




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MADHU
SOODAN PRASAD
Signing time: 11-11-2022
09:50:00 AM
                                                          2

                                 SMT. BHAGWATI SHARMA W/O DINESH
                                 SHARMA D/O LATE LAXMIKANT
                           1(3) SHARMA AGED 55 YEARS, R/O SURI
                                 NAGAR MORAR, DISTT. GWALIOR
                                 (M.P.)
                                 SMT. UMA SHARMA W/O SHRI
                                 PRADEEP    SHARMA      D/O    LATE
                           1(4)
                                 LAXMIKANT SHARMA, R/O RAILWAY
                                 COLONY, SIHORE M.P.
                                 NARENDRA KUMAR SHARMA S/O
                                 LAXMIKANT SHARMA, AGED ABOUT
                           2     37 YEARS, R/O 143/12, RAJESHWARI
                                 ROAD, DISTT.SHVIPURI (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)
                                 SMT.SHANTI DEVI SHARMA W/O
                                 LAXMIKANT SHARMA, AGED ABOUT
                           3     67 YEARS, R/O 143/12, RAJESHWARI
                                 ROAD, DISTT.SHVIPURI (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)
                                 MANENDRA SHARMA S/O INDRAPAL
                                 SHARMA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
                                 OCCUPATION:     R/O      FATEHPUR
                           4
                                 SHIVPURI PERMANENT R/O SAROJNI
                                 NAGAR, OPP. SAINIK P.S. DISTT.
                                 LUCKNOW (UTTAR PRADESH)
                                 STATE      OF        M.P.      TH:
                           5     COLLECTOR,DISTT.SHIVPURI
                                 SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                                .....RESPONDENTS
                                (NONE FOR RESPONDENTS No.1 to 3/PLAINTIFFS
                                THOUGH SERVED)

                               This appeal coming on for hearing this day, the court passed
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MADHU
SOODAN PRASAD
Signing time: 11-11-2022
09:50:00 AM
                                                              3

                           the following:

                                                      JUDGMENT

Being aggrieved by the judgment passed by the 2nd

Additional District Judge, Shivpuri, in Civil Suit No.14-A/2011

on 20.9.2013, by which trial Court has decreed the suit of the

respondents/plaintiffs, appellant/defendant has preferred this

appeal.

2. In brief facts of the case are that respondent

No.1/Laxmikant Sharma executed a registered power of attorney

in favour of respondent No.4-Manendra Sharma on 23.6.2007

and 18.7.2007 by which he has been authorized to execute sale-

deed of his property. After execution of power of attorney,

Manendra Sharma executed sale-deed in favour of appellant Smt.

Kamla Shukla for consideration of Rs. four lac ninety thousand

for sale of agricultural land situated at village Badodi survey

No.244 Min 3 area 2 Beegha 1 Biswa, 0.428 hectare and got the

consideration amount and also gave possession of the aforesaid Signature Not Verified Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD Signing time: 11-11-2022 09:50:00 AM

property. On the basis of aforesaid registered sale-deed, name of

the appellant was mutated in the revenue records. Thereafter,

respondents/plaintiffs filed a civil suit against appellant and

Manendra Sharma with the relief that aforesaid power of

attorney dated 23.6.2007 and 18.7.2007 and sale-deed be

declared null and void and they be declared as owner of the

aforesaid land. Plaintiffs mentioned in the suit that cause of

action arose on 18.12.2009 when appellant tried to dispossess

them. As per their pleadings, Laxmikant Sharma was of unsound

mind and petrol pump Manager Manendra Sharma by taking

advantage of aforesaid mental condition of Laxmikant Sharma,

got executed power of attorney in his favour and thereafter on

the basis of said power of attorney executed sale-deed of the

aforesaid land in favour of the appellant. When they came to

know about this transaction, they took out documents from the

concerned department and filed aforesaid suit.

3. In support of the suit, plaintiffs adduced evidence of son of Signature Not Verified Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD Signing time: 11-11-2022 09:50:00 AM

Laxmikant Sharma, namely Narendra Kumar Sharma (PW-1),

brother of Laxmikant Sharma, namely Ramkrishna Sharma (PW-

2) and treating doctor Kuldeep Singh (PW-3).

4. As per Narendra Sharma, Manendra Sharma by taking

advantage of unsoundness of mind of his father Laxmikant

Sharma got executed two power of attorney on 25.6.2007 and

18.7.2007 in his favour and thereafter executed two sale-deeds in

favour of Bindobai and Vimla Devi and appellant Kamla Shukla

on 1.8.2007. At the time of execution of power of attorney his

father Laxmikant Sharma was of unsound mind and his treatment

was going on. In these situation, he was not in a mental state to

execute the power of attorney. He has submitted documents

(Ex.P/1 to Ex.P/10) regarding treatment of his father. During

cross-examination, in para 10 he has admitted that his father for

the first time was brought to the mental hospital Gwalior on

4.9.2008 for checkup. Before that, his father was treated by some

private doctors at Shivpuri, but he does not remember their Signature Not Verified Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD Signing time: 11-11-2022 09:50:00 AM

names. He is having no knowledge regarding documents Ex.D/5

to Ex.D/9. He is having no knowledge that on 8.5.2007 an

agreement (Ex.D/2) was executed between his father Laxmikant

and Rajesh Soni. He is having no knowledge that his father had

filed any complaint against Rajesh Soni for dishonour of cheque

dated 8.5.2007. On coming to the knowledge that Manendra

Sharma has executed a sale-deed (Ex.P/13) on the basis of power

of attorney, neither he nor his family has lodged any police report

nor filed a complaint before the Court. He denied that his father

in good state of mind executed power of attorney in favour of

respondent No.4-Manendra Sharma who thereafter executed a

sale-deed in favour of the appellant.

5. Looking to the evidence of this respondent/plaintiff, it

emerges out that he has challenged the power of attorney and

sale-deed on the basis of unsoundness of mind of his father

Laxmikant Sharma. In support of his illness, from the side of the

plaintiffs evidence of Dr. Kuldeep Singh (PW-3), who is Medical Signature Not Verified Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD Signing time: 11-11-2022 09:50:00 AM

Officer in the Mental Hospital, Gwalior, has been adduced. He

has stated that he has been posted as Medical Officer in Gwalior

Mental Hospital since 2000. Medical papers Ex.P/2 to Ex.P/5 &

Ex.P/8 to Ex.P/10 have been written by him which are treatment

papers of Laxmikant Sharma. On 4.9.2008 Laxmikant Sharma

came for checkup along with his neighbourer Mahendra Kumar

Sharma. Afterwards on 23.9.2008 some person came on his

behalf. On 1.6.2007 he came before him and complained of less

sleep, less appetite, anxiety and also complained that at times he

use to talk absurd and due to this remains in tension. According

to him, he is suffering from depression, but afterwards his

condition started improving. Thereafter in 2010 after two years

he came for further check-up and he again treated him. During

cross-examination, he has admitted that Laxmikant Sharma was

not of unsound mind. He has having full knowledge about his

welfare, loss and profit. During illness also he was having

understanding to return to his house. He was only having Signature Not Verified Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD Signing time: 11-11-2022 09:50:00 AM

depression in which everybody is capable to understand his

welfare and use his discretion. His mental status is not disturbed.

6. Looking to the evidence adduced on behalf of the

respondents/plaintiffs, this fact no where reflects that at the time

of execution of power of attorney in favour of Manendra

Sharma, owner of the property Laxmikant Sharma was suffering

from any unsoundness of mind. Beside this, from the evidence of

Dr. Kuldeep Singh, it emerges out that he is only having problem

of depression and which started improving. Beside this,

appellant/defendant adduced evidence that on seeing the power

of attorney of Manendra Sharma by paying consideration amount

of Rs.four lac ninety thousand, she has purchased the aforesaid

land by registered sale-deed and got the possession of the same.

Her name was also mutated in the revenue records. Appellant

also produced documents; Ex.D/1, copy of the complaint under

Section 138 of the NI Act lodged by Laxmikant Sharma against

Rajesh Kumar Soni, Ex.D/2 copy of agreement in favour of Signature Not Verified Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD Signing time: 11-11-2022 09:50:00 AM

Rajesh Soni by Laxmikant Sharma on 8.5.2007, Ex.D/3, copy of

the affidavit of Laxmikant Sharma, Ex.D/4, copy of cheque

issued by Rajesh Soni in favour Laxmikant Sharma, Ex.D/10,

application for taking copy of the power of attorney before the

Sub-Registrar, Ex.D/11, copy of the power of attorney, in support

of her case.

7. In view of the aforesaid evidence, it is clear that

Laxmikant Sharma at the time of execution of power of attorney

was not of unsound mind, and therefore, in the considered

opinion of this Court, trial Court has committed error in allowing

& decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs. This appeal is accordingly

allowed and the impugned judgment & decree of the trial Court

is set aside.

(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL) Judge

ms/-

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD Signing time: 11-11-2022 09:50:00 AM