LALITABAI Vs. DAYALAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RELIANCE , Shri R.D. Jain, placed on this Court's decision in Dharamwati Bai's case (AIR 1991 MP 18) to submit that whether Ram Bai, the vendor of the defendants/appellant died in the year 1949 or 1950 or in 1956 was immaterial.

(2.) THE fact which was material was her possession of the suit land and of her acquiring title thereon in virture of her possession as held in Dharamwati Bai, It is his submission that trial Court rightly, therefore, dismissed the plaintiffs' suit who had assailed Ram Bai's sale on the ground that he had no title to the land as Puran was not her husband and that Ram Bai otherwise also had no proprietary right, interest or title which she could pass by the impugned sale.

(3.) TWO documents, Ex. D/9 and Ex. D/10 obviously have a crucial role to play to determine crucial issue surfacing for decision in this appeal. Ex. D/10, containing admission of plaintiff No.1, Dayalal, is the copy of the plaint of the suit he had filed earlier in the Court of Civil Judge, Class II,. Basoda. Ex. D/9 is certified copy of the Register of suits of that Court is which there is entry concerning the suit with respect to which the plaint was proved in the trial Court through D. W. 1. It is true, an objection was raised to the admissibility of Ex. D/10 and that remained undecided by the trial Court. Still, the trial Court relied on that document, but the lower appellate Court found that reliance inappropriate because of the question of admissibility had not been decided and he decided that in appeal against the defendants.