PUNNI DEVI Vs. HANS RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the judgment of reversal passed by the learned District Judge, dismissing the suit of the Plaintiffs Ram Lal, Vaneet Nag, Atul Nag, Jagan Nath, Kishori Lal and Surinder Nath.

(2.) THE Plaintiffs had approached the learned trial Court praying for a decree of declaration and consequential relief of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the Defendants from interfering in the suit land. The case set out by the Plaintiffs in the learned trial Court is that the suit land was owned and possessed by the Plaintiffs and the entry of possession in favour of Defendants No. 1 and 2 was wrong. Relief was claimed on the settled issue No. 3that the tenancy with respect to the suit land had been relinquished by the father of the Defendants in favour of the Plaintiffs and the proforma Respondents.

(3.) THE point for consideration before the learned appellate Court was that whether Ex.PW -2/A,which was writing executed by the predecessor -in -interest of the Defendants relinquishing tenancy in favour of the Plaintiffs, was valid and binding and whether it had been acted upon. The learned District Judge, holds; (a) that Ex.PW -2/A has been executed on plain paper and is not registered and accordingly could not be admitted in evidence and (b) that the document was executed on 15.6.1967 and it had not been acted upon by the parties. The suit was accordingly dismissed.