SUSHILABAI Vs. LAXMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants are hereby assailing the correctness, propriety and legality of the decree passed by the Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Indore in Regular Civil Appeal No. 75-A of 1987 by which he set aside the decree which was passed by IIIrd Civil Judge Class II, Indore in the matter of Civil Suit No. 69-A of 1974 which was in favour of the appellants.

(2.) THIS appeal has been admitted on following substantial questions:

(3.) SHRI Upadhyaya, learned Counsel for the appellants by making reference to the evidence on record submitted that respondent Laxman has not proved that he became the owner of the suit property by his adverse possession. He submitted further that the first Appellate Court committed the error of law in coming to the conclusion that respondent Laxman inherited the property of Saibai in view of Section 15 (1) (d) of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as Succession Act for convenience ). He also submitted that doctrine of "tacking" does not apply in the present case because it is inconsistent with evidence on record. He made reference to Section 93 of Transfer of Property Act in this context.