RAM PIARI Vs. RAM DITTA MAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents-plaintiffs filed suit for possession of the house in dispute alleging that defendant No. 1 was in possession of a room of the house in her capacity as aunt of plaintiff Ram Dutta and later on occupied remaining part of the house also; defendant Nos. 2 to 4 were residing with defendant No. 1 Ram Piari. The suit was contested and the defendants claimed to be owner in possession in their own right since the year (sic) and an alternative plea of adverse possession was also taken.

(2.) The trial Court decreed the suit holding that plaintiff Ram Ditta was allotted the house by Rehabilitation Department, as shown by conveyance deed Ex. T-1 (also exhibited as PX) and allotment letter Ex.PY and a part of the house was sold by plaintiff No. 1 to plaintiff No. 2 vide registered sale deed dated 8.2.1974, Ex. P-2.

(3.) The appellants-defendants preferred an appeal and submitted that the conveyance deed showed plaintiffs Ram Ditta and Jumman Ram, husband of defendant Ram Piari, were joint allottees. The appellate Court found no reason to permit additional evidence at the appellate stage and on the basis of evidence already existing, the case of the defendants was found without any legal merit.