RAMDEO SINGH Vs. MANGALDEEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the plaintiffs which was admitted on the following substantial questions of law:-

(2.) FACTS giving rise to filing of this appeal, briefly stated, are that the plaintiffs filed suit on the ground that the suit land admeasuring 1.17 acres are their ancestral lands. However, the defendant No.1 in clandestine manner, in collusion with Patwari, got his name recorded in the revenue records. Thereafter, the defendant No.1 without any notice to the plaintiffs got his name mutated in the revenue records on 14.2.1981 and in 1984 forcibly took possession of the suit land. The plaintiffs therefore filed the suit seeking relief of possession and mesne profit.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.1 submitted that lower appellate Court has rightly reversed the findings recorded by the trial Court. It is further submitted that revenue entries on record as well as documents (Exhibits-D-1 to D-12) clearly indicate that defendant No.1 is the owner and in possession of the suit lands. It is further submitted that the judgment and decree passed by the lower appellate Court does not call for any interference by this Court in exercise of powers under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure.