HARMESH LAL Vs. SHINGARA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RESPONDENT-plaintiff filed a suit for possession of the house, description of which was given in his plaint. It was his case that he was owner of the house and had given the same, to the appellant-defendant, for a short stay, at his request. Subsequent thereto, when the appellant failed to vacate the property, he was compelled to file the suit. His suit was dismissed. However, he succeeded in appeal.

(2.) APPELLATE Court below while reversing the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court, has relied upon jamabandis for the years 1978-1979 and 1988-1989, wherein the respondent was shown as owner of khasra No.28//15/11(0-3). To rebut presumption of truth attached to those jamabandis, appellant has failed to bring on record any convincing evidence, except making his own bald statement. Even his statement has been discarded by the appellant Court below, by noticing many discrepancies in the same. Appellant has also taken a defence of adverse possession. If that is so, it is not open to him to say that the respondent was not owner of the property, in dispute. As he has failed to show his adverse possession, argument to that extent was also discarded by the appellate Court below. It is contention of counsel for the appellant that reference has wrongly been made by the appellate Court below, to some marked documents, which are not proved on record. Be that as it may, even without looking into those documents, case of the respondent stands proved. No case is made out for interference as counsel has failed to raise any substantial question of law at the time of arguments.