BHINKA Vs. CHARAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE following Judgment of the court was delivered by

(2.) THESE six appeals, by special leave werefiled against the judgment of the Board of Revenue dated 28/07/1954.

(3.) WE shall take the fifth contention next. That contention raises the question whether the appellants were hereditary tenants of the disputed lands. The three courts have concurrently held on a consideration of oral and documentary evidence that they were not hereditary tenants. The learned Counsel for the appellants made an attempt to reopen the said finding by contending that it was vitiated by the following errors of law: (i) Though the appellants filed a certified copy of the khatauni of 1355 fasli, the courts did not draw the presumption, which they were bound to do, to the effect that the said certified copy was a genuine document and that the person who purported to have signed it had held the official character which he claimed to hold in the said document; (ii) as the Magistrate made an order in favour of the appellants under s. 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the courts should have thrown the burden of proof on the respondent; (iii) the material evidence adduced on the side of the appellants was ignored; (iv) the courts applied different standards of proof to the appellants and the respondent in regard to the certified copies of khatauni and khasra prepared by the same patwari, Ahmed Ali; and (v) the courts also ignored the rights accrued to the appellants and ss: 10, 16 and 20 of the U. P. Tenancy Act. For convenience of reference and to distinguish the alleged errors of law from the main contentions, we shall refer to the former as points.