GANGARAM KANHYALAL Vs. POORAN GULAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is Plaintiff's second appeal under Section 525 Gwalior Code of Civil Procedure. The Plaintiff suit for title and for possession of a house was dismissed by the trial Court and his appeal has been dismissed by the first appellate Court. He has, therefore, come in second appeal to this Court. The plaint had alleged that the house in question belonged to the Plaintiff, that Pooran Defendant I had been in occupation of this house and his and his son Ram Prasad (Defendant 2), without Plaintiff's authority, sold this house for a sum of Rs. 1,500/ - to Defendants 3 to 6. The house, it was alleged, was at the time of the institution of the suit, in possession of the Defendants 3 to 6.

(2.) NOW the first issue was whether the Plaintiff was the owner of the house? Oral evidence has been adduced by the parties and the trial Court which had the advantage of seeing the witness did not believe the evidence adduced on behalf the Plaintiff. Now it is very important in this case that Plaintiff Gangaram did not appear as a (witness?) and no reason is forthcoming what prevent him from coming to the Court. Mr. Himayatulla (sic) on behalf of Gangaram Plaintiff Appellant, drew must (sic) attention to the statement of Khushali and Heera two witnesses produced by the Plaintiff and I do not find anything in their statements which incline me to take a view different from taken by the trial Court, on the point.

(3.) THE only point worth consideration in this appeal is about the value to be attached to the statements of Behari P.W. 3, Kundan P.W. and (sic) Mangal P.W. 5 who deposed that Pooran and (sic) admitted before the Panchas that the house had (sic) belonged to Ganga Ram Plaintiff and that he (sic) had sold this house without authority to Defendants 3 to 6.