PARTAP RAJ SINGH Vs. RAGHUNATH SINGH @ RUGANDAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this appeal is to the judgments and decrees passed by both the Courts below by which the suit for permanent injunction filed by the appellant has been dismissed and the plaintiff has not been held to be owner of Khasra No. 144/25/1/1 and co-sharer in Khasra No. 144/26.

(2.) THE plaintiff claimed himself to be the owner in possession of the suit land falling in Khasra No. 144/25/1(2-19) and co-sharer in Khasra No. 144/26(0-11) on the basis of a gift deed jointly executed by his father Giriraj Singh and uncle Krishan Kumar in the year 1971. On the basis of this the plaintiff filed the present suit for declaration and seeking permanent injunction against the defendants or in the alternative, he sought himself to be declared having become owner and co-sharer of the suit land by way of prescription and adverse possession for the last more than 12 years. The defendants contested the claim of the plaintiff by contending that the predecessors-in-interest of the plaintiff, namely, Giriraj Singh and Krishan Kumar, were neither the owners nor co-sharers of the suit land. Thus, it was contended that the gift-deed executed by them was not legally valid and also not binding upon them. After hearing the counsel for the parties and on examining the evidence adduced on record, the Sub-Judge Ist Class, Palwal, dismissed the suit filed by the appellant by holding that he was neither proved to be the owner in possession of the suit land falling in Khasra No. 144/25/1/2(2-19) nor co-sharer in Khasra No. 144/26(0-11). The appeal filed by the plaintiff was also dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Faridabad vide judgment and decree dated 18.2.1987. Now the plaintiff has filed the present appeal to challenge the judgments and decrees passed by both the Courts below.

(3.) THE only question that arises for consideration by this Court is to the following effect :-