GAHGI DEVI Vs. SHIV LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The suit filed by the plaintiffs-appellants was decreed by the trial Court, but the same has been dismissed by the lower appellate Court on the ground that the partition deed, mark A, was not admissible in evidence.

(2.) Counsel for the appellants submitted that even if the partition deed, mark A is ignored, the suit property being ancestral, the title of the plaintiff could not be extinguished and therefore, the plaintiffs were entitled to decree for joint possession. He further pointed out that the plea of the defendants for adverse possession was rejected by the trial Court, which has not been interfered with by the lower appellate Court.

(3.) I find force in the submissions. The view of lower appellate Court appears to be patently erroneous. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and decree of lower appellate Court is set aside and that of the trial Court restored, and suit of the appellants-plaintiffs is decreed for joint possession.