https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466008 In second appeal, the High Court cannot disturb the First Appellate Court's findings of fact unless a substantial question of law arises, so its interference with the factual finding on the executant's unsound mind was improper. The document also states that the sale deed dated 11.7.1983 was liable to be set aside because medical evidence, surrounding circumstances, and the marked inadequacy and disparity in consideration supported the inference that the executant was not in a normal state of mind and that the transaction was tainted by fraud. On that basis, the First Appellate Court's decree was restored and the sale deed was quashed. en-us Wed, 29 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Jan 2026 14:58:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466008 In second appeal, the High Court cannot disturb the First Appellate Court's findings of fact unless a substantial question of law arises, so its interference with the factual finding on the executant's unsound mind was improper. The document also states that the sale deed dated 11.7.1983 was liable to be set aside because medical evidence, surrounding circumstances, and the marked inadequacy and disparity in consideration supported the inference that the executant was not in a normal state of mind and that the transaction was tainted by fraud. On that basis, the First Appellate Court's decree was restored and the sale deed was quashed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 29 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466008