DAYA RAM Vs. DHANI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal has been preferred against the order of the learned Additional Commissioner dated 12.5.93 in which learned Additional Commissioner has dismissed the appeal filed against the order of the learned trial Court dated 27.5.89 in which learned trial Court has decreed the suit of the plaintiff/respondent.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that a suit under Sec. 229-B of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act was filed by Dhani Ram and Ahibaran sons of Durga against Daya Ram on the ground that Malkhan was the original tenure-holder of plot No. 182 area 1.68 acres and being the near relative of Malkhan, Malkhan has executed a registered Will in favour of the plaintiffs and defendant on the basis of a forged Will dated 25.7.83 has applied for mutation and concerned Naib Tahsildar has mutated the name of defendant Daya Ram on the basis of forged Will deed. Being aggrieved by this order plaintiff has filed a suit under Sec. 229-B of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act. This suit was decreed on 27.5.89 and Dhani Ram plaintiffs/respondent were declared as bhumidhar of the disputed plot. Being aggrieved by this order of the trial Court the defendant Daya Ram has filed first appeal No. 276 of 88-89 which was dismissed on 12.5.93. After dismissal of the first appeal this second appeal has been filed by Daya Ram defendant/appellant.

(3.) Heard both the Counsels for the parties.