MUNNA LAL Vs. KAISHAV PRASAD DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) UMESHWAR Pandey, J. Heard Sri S. K. Rai learned Counsel for the appellant.

(2.) THIS appeal arises out of the judgment and decree dated 8-8-2006 whereby the plaintiff's appeal has been dismissed and the judgment of the trial Court has been affirmed.

(3.) THE trial Court upon the evidence and other materials available on record was of the view that the agreement in question was not executed by defendant No. 2. THE document being an unregistered one, it could not be enforced for grant of the relief of specific performance of the same. This finding was also concurred by the appellate Court. It is, however, found in the judgments of the Courts below that the possession of the plaintiff over one room of the disputed property is there in which he was inducted as a tenant. THE Courts below on the basis of findings that the plaintiff does not have a vested right or title over the property did not find it proper to grant the relief of permanent injunction and the suit as a whole as well as the appeal have been dismissed.