PUSHPA BAI Vs. TULSI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal preferred by the plaintiff was admitted on the following substantial question of law: -? "Whether both the Courts below were justified in dismissing the suit of the plaintiff for correction of sale deed dated 25/01/1985 executed by defendant No.1 in favour of plaintiff ignoring Ex.P/2 and other admissible evidence on record by recording a finding which is perverse and contrary to the record?" (For the sake of convenience, parties hereinafter will be referred as per their status shown and ranking given in the plaint before the trial Court.)

(2.) The plaintiff filed suit for rectification of sale deed dated 25-?1-?1985 (Ex.P-?1) stating inter alia that she has purchased suit land bearing Khasra No.2411/1, area 0.24 acre, but a typographical error has been crept-?in in executing the sale deed and Khasra number has been mentioned as 3930, area 0.24 acre, therefore, she is entitled for rectification of the sale deed and consequently, permanent injunction.

(3.) Defendant No.1 was ex parte before the trial Court and neither filed written statement nor adduced any evidence in support of his case.