Saeed-Uz-Zaman Siddiqi, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for appellant and perused the records.
(2.) The instant second appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 31.01.2012, passed by learned Civil Judge (J.D.) East Hardoi in Regular Suit No.428 of 2007 by which the suit of the plaintiff for cancellation of sale deed and permanent injunction was dismissed with costs and civil appeal no.11 of 2012 has been allowed vide judgment and decree dated 6.3.2013 and the will deed was canceled and suit for permanent injunction was decreed by learned Additional District Judge, Court No.5, Hardoi. Brief facts of the case are that Shyam Sunder died and the plaintiff became owner of his property. The defendant got a fictitious will deed executed by Shyam Lal dated 19.12.2005 by impersonation and he did not execute any will deed. The learned Trial Court did not appreciate the evidence led by the parties in its correct perspective. The learned First Appellate Court has reappraised the evidence led by the partied and has relied on a number of decisions of this Court as well as Hon'ble Apex Court and reached to the conclusion that it was incumbent upon the defendant to have prove the execution of the sale deed in his favour but he failed to do so as required under Section 68 of Evidence Act. This is a case of reappraisal of evidence which is not permissible in the second appeal.
(3.) A detailed hearing and perusal of the judgment and orders of both the Courts below made it abundantly clear that no substantial question of law is involved in this appeal. Even appreciation of evidence by the two Courts below has not been assailed before this Court.;