GURMAIL SINGH Vs. BALBIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C .M. No. 317-C of 1998 is allowed subject to just exceptions. The deficiency of Rs. 1.25 paise has already been made up. Consequently, the delay in making up the deficiency is condoned. C.M. stands disposed of.

(2.) C .M. No. 318-C of 1998 is allowed subject to just exceptions.

(3.) HEARD . Both the Courts below have given a concurrent finding of fact that plaintiffs have miserably failed to prove possession on the property in dispute or their any interest in the property. In fact the Courts below have relied upon the judgment of this Court in C.W.P. No. 9022 of 1994, copy of which was exhibited as Ex. P-4, which was subsequently withdrawn. The learned first Appellate Court has categorically come to the conclusion that a false and frivolous suit has been filed by the plaintiffs and also that the present respondents were in possession of the property in dispute and were so described in the relevant revenue records. In view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Rajinder Kumar v. Jamna Dass Kotewala, JT 1990(3) Supreme Court 197, this Court is not to interfere in the concurrent findings of facts, where the evidence is neither perverse nor the conclusions are violative of basic principles of law.