ANYSAUA GOVIND SHENDE Vs. NARAYAN SHAMRAO SHENDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Second Appeal has been preferred by the original defendant No. I/appellant herein, against the judgment and decree passed by the additional District Judge, Wardha, in Regular Civil Appeal No. 28 of 1987 dated 8th January, 1991, whereby the judgment and decree passed by the Third Joint civil Judge, Junior Division, Wardha, in Regular Civil Suit No. 369 of 1978 dated 22nd December, 1986, was set aside.

(2.) THIS Second Appeal was admitted on 19th June, 1991, on the question: whether the presumption as envisaged by section 112 is available under the set of circumstances as borne on record?

(3.) HEARD learned counsel Mr. Modak for the appellants and Mr. A. B. Chaudhary, learned counsel for the contesting respondents. There is no other substantial question of law raised and/or argued. The learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Modak, relied on AIR (31) 1944 Oudh 162, Ch. Kanhaiya Bux singh and anr. vs. Mt. Ram Dei Kuer and ors. , AIR 1954 SC 176, Chilukuri venkateshwarlu vs. Chilukuri Venkatanarayana, and AIR 2001 SC 2226 = 2001 (5) SCC 311, Smt. Kamti Devi and anr. vs. Poshi Ram. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents relied on AIR 1987 SC 1045, The State of Punjab vs. Surjit Singh, AIR 1993 SC 2295, Goutam Kundu vs. State of West Bengal and anr. and on unreported judgment in S. A. 92 of 1988 dated 26th August, 2003 of the Bombay High Court Vithalrao @ Wamanrao P. Deshmukh vs. Ramesh s/o wamanrao @ Vithalrao Deshmukh.