hand, the plaintiff, without challenging the abovesaid documents in any manner, has vaguely averred that certain documents had been fraudulently obtained by the defendants behind his back and accordingly, the same are not binding upon him and that, the plaintiff is ignoring the same, but, when he has not come forward with the clear case as to under what circumstances and on what dates, the abovesaid documents had come to be obtained from him and on the other hand, when during the course of evidence, it is seen that the plaintiff is a willing and consenting party to the abovesaid transactions and admitted his signature in all the abovesaid documents one way or the other, in such view of the matter, when the plaintiff and the defendants are found to have already effected partition in respect of the suit properties and the parties had been allotted their due shares one way or the other, it is thus found and as determined by the trial Court, with a view to deprive the defendants 3 & 4 of the lawfull shares allotted to them, it is seen that the plaintiff has chosen to levy the suit with vague pleas and untenable allegations and however, unable to establish the same one way or the other in the manner known to law and particularly, as put forth by the defendants' counsel, when the plaintiff has not chosen to impugn the abovesaid transactions between the parties as null and void and not binding upon him on the ground that they had been fraudulently obtained by seeking appropriate declaratory reliefs, it is seen that the abovesaid transactions are binding upon the plaintiff as determined by the trial Court. http://www.judis.nic.in
