SHISHWATI Vs. RAM GOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT filed a suit for permanent and mandatory injunction against the respondents for restraining them from raising any construction, or to attempt to fence with barbed wire, or to create any third party interest in the property bearing No. 12/109-E, Geeta Colony, Delhi, claiming herself to be the owner of the same. She also sought mandatory injunction for directing the respondents to remove the door from the wall of premises No.12/109-C, Geeta Colony, Delhi. The said suit was dismissed by the Trial Court vide its judgment and decree dated 28th August, 2004.

(2.) AGGRIEVED by the said judgment and decree, appellant filed regular appeal being RCA No.11/09 before the Additional District Judge, Delhi. The said appeal also met the same fate and was dismissed by the Appellate Court vide his judgment dated 26th October, 2009. Hence, this second appeal.

(3.) SECTION 58 of the Evidence Act speaks of facts admitted need not be proved in evidence. However, proviso to this Section empowers a court to require the facts admitted to be proved otherwise than by such admissions. Since respondents contested the suit but, did not file the written statement, it cannot be said that respondent admitted the claim of appellant. Therefore, Trial Court did not err in law when it ignored the provision of Section 58 of the Evidence Act.