PREMNARAYAN V.

KUNWARJI

MEMORI AL ON BEHALF OF APPELANT
BEFORE THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

In The matter of,

PREMNARAYAN
VERSUS
KUNWARJI




SUBMISSION TO
THE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
17
th
OCTOBER 1993



MEMORANDUM FOR THE APPELLANT


ARUN KARORIYA

Roll No. 40 Semester - I
(COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT)
PREMNARAYAN V. KUNWARJI

MEMORI AL ON BEHALF OF APPELANT
TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Abbreviations..iii
Index of authoritiesiv
I. Statement of Jurisdiction..v
II. Statement of facts....vi



















PREMNARAYAN V. KUNWARJI

MEMORI AL ON BEHALF OF APPELANT
ABBREVIATIONS
& And
AIR All India Reported
B&Ald Barnewall& Alderson
Co. Company
CTC Canada Tax Cases
Del Delhi
DLR Dominion Law Reports
Ed. Edition
Honble Honourable
ILR Indian Law Reporter
LR Law Reports (England)
LT Law Times Reporter
M & S Maule & Selwyn
QB Queens Bench Reports
QBD Queens Bench Division (England)
S. Section
SC Supreme Court
v. Versus



PREMNARAYAN V. KUNWARJI

MEMORI AL ON BEHALF OF APPELANT






LIST OF CASES

BOOKS REFERRED
ANSONS, LAW OF CONTRACT, (28
th
ed. 2002)
AVTAR SINGH, CONTRACT AND SPECIFIC RELIEF, (10th ed. 2013)
CHITTY, CONTRACTS VOLUME 1 GENERAL PRINCIPLES, (13th ed. 2008)
POLLOCK & MULLA, INDIAN CONTRACT AND SPECIFIC RELIEF ACTS, (13th
ed. 2011)






PREMNARAYAN V. KUNWARJI

MEMORI AL ON BEHALF OF APPELANT



















PREMNARAYAN V. KUNWARJI

MEMORI AL ON BEHALF OF APPELANT
STATEMENT OF FACTS

The suit property is Order 423 hectares, area of land, survey No. 160, situated at village
Bawan Heda, Tahsil Shujalpur, delineated in red in the map filed with the plaint. The case of
the plaintiffs was that they had purchased the suit property under a registered deed of sale
dated 13-1-72, however, possession was not delivered to the plaintiffs.
The suit was for possession on the basis of their title along with the relief of recovery of
mesne profits. It appears that there were two deeds of sale executed on the same day between
the parties. While the plaintiff transferred a piece of land to the defendant, the defendant too
transferred the suit land to the plaintiff. Both the documents recite a consideration of Rs. 500/-
each, said to have been paid anterior to the execution and registration of the deed of sale.
The trial Court found that in reality there was an exchange of the two pieces of land between
the parties which exchange was outwardly evidenced by executing two separate deeds of sale.
This theory of exchange has been discarded by the lower appellate Court holding thai the
contents of the two documents indicated two separate transactions having been entered into
between the parties.
The lower appellate Court further held that in so far as the documents executed in favour of
the plaintiff-appellants was concerned, the same was vitiated for want of consideration and
also by excicise of undue influence.










PREMNARAYAN V. KUNWARJI

MEMORI AL ON BEHALF OF APPELANT
ISSUES RAISED
1. Whether the contract was Valid or not valid?
2.























PREMNARAYAN V. KUNWARJI

MEMORI AL ON BEHALF OF APPELANT
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
























PREMNARAYAN V. KUNWARJI

MEMORI AL ON BEHALF OF APPELANT
WRITTEN SUBMISSION

























PREMNARAYAN V. KUNWARJI

MEMORI AL ON BEHALF OF APPELANT

PRAYER

Therefore, in the light of issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited, the Honble court may be pleased
to declare and adjudge that:

A. The appeal is allowed.

Or to pass any other order, which this court may deem fit in the interest of Justice, Equity and Good Conscience.

All of which is most humbly prayed.

Place: India
Date: 30
th
August 1965 Council for the Appellant