MAHABIR Vs. SURTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is plaintiffs appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 challenging concurrent findings of facts recorded by both the Courts below holding that the suit of the plaintiff-appellants for permanent injunction for possession with respect to the suit land is liable to be dismissed because their claim that the suit land is comprised in khasra No. 156 as per bandobst No. 1897 has not been proved. No documentary evidence was produced connecting khasra No. 156 as per bandobast 1897 with that of 378 which is the later khasra. It was claimed to be a changed khasra number according to bandobast 1909. The view of the lower appellate Court on the issue is as under :-

(2.) THE report of the Local Commissioner opining that the suit land form part of khasra No. 156 has also not been accepted by the Courts below on the ground that the report is not in accordance with the requirements laid down by this Court in tile High Court Rules and Orders Volume 1, Chapter I-M under the heading 'Hadd Shikni'. The illegality pointed out in the report of the Local Commissioner by the Courts below is that the demarcation of the suit property has not been made by fixing three pucca points as is required by the High Court Rules and Orders (supra). It has further been found that defendant- respondents were not associated nor they were called to come on tile spot. The aforementioned position emerges from the reading of paras 16, 17 and 18 of the judgment.