SMT. JANNATUNNISA Vs. RAFI AHMAD ETC.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Smt. Jannatunnisa files second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 19-7-1996 dismissing first appeal against the order of trial Court dated 30-9-1994 dismissing the lawsuit in an action under Sec. 229-8, Z. A. and L. R. Act.

(2.) The facts as per exposition in the pleadings are : On 26-7-1988 Smt. Jannatunnisa institutes a lawsuit under Sec. 229-B, Z. A. and L. R. Act on the ground that defendant Abdul Gaffar was a Bhumidhar tenant of the holding. On 30-7-1986 he executes a sale in favour of herself and defendant Awadhesh. They were let into possession. Defendants Rafi Ahmad's 1 to 4 have forged a sale-deed dated 20-3-1967 which purports to be executed by Abdul Gaffar in their favour and also in favour of herself. The said sale-deed is completely void and inoperative; that defendants 1 to 4 are not in possession and have no concern with suit land. The witnesses of sale-deed are own men of Rafi Ahmad's. On basis of this document Rafi Ahmads moves for mutation in Tahsildar's and have secured an ex-parte order on 24-11-1986. On getting scent of that action in law she has moved for restoration on 23-4-1967. The relief of a is Bhumidhar tenant with defendant Awadhesh is prayed for.

(3.) The claim evokes a sharp rebuttal in a written statement dated 6-12-1988 lodged by Rafi Ahmad's D/1 to D/4. It is alleged through the sale-deed dated 20-3-1967 they are Bhmnidhar tenants in possession. Their joint share is 4/5 in the holding; the share of Smt. Jannatunnisa is ⅕th. The rest of allegation have been stoutly denied : that sale-deed dated 20-3-1967 is bad in law and inoperative. It has no signature of vendor Abdul Ghaffar. The relief to dismiss the suit is prayed for. The pleadings of the parties lead to issues. Parties have been given chance to adduce their documentary and oral evidence.