LATURIA RAM Vs. PUNNU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is directed against the judgement and decree dated 27.6.2000 passed by the learned District Judge, Mandi whereby he allowed the appeal and decreed the suit of the plaintiff and set-aside the judgement and decree dated 1.1.1996 passed by the learned Sub Judge 1st Class, Sarkaghat, District Mandi whereby he had dismissed the suit of the plaintiff.

(2.) THIS appeal was admitted on the following questions of law:- 1. Whether the presumption of truth to the long standing entries in the record of right since 1966 attached under Section 45 of the H.P.Land Revenue Act can be said to have been rebutted by the oral evidence? 2. Whether the first Appellate Court has misread and mis-appreciated the revenue record produced on behalf of the defendants which has resulted in upsetting the judgement and decree of the trial Judge?

(3.) THE plaintiff filed an appeal. THE learned lower Appellate Court allowed the appeal. According to the learned lower Appellate Court there was no admission by the plaintiff and as per his findings no relationship of landlord and tenant existed. THE learned lower Appellate court also held that adverse inference had to be drawn against the defendant since he did not step into the witness box and decreed the suit of the plaintiff. Hence, this appeal by the defendant.