BADRI PERSAD Vs. JABBAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been filed against the appellate order of the Addl. Commissioner II, Jaipur dated 19. 7. 60 reversing the original order of the S. D. O. Bahror dated 7. 11. 59 in a case under sec. 186 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act.

(2.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the record as well. The material as it exists on record is not adequate to warrant a final adjudication of the controversy. The opposite party claims to be in possession through some pattas alleged to have been executed in their favour. The executant denied the execution. The trial court held the execution was not proved. The first appellate court took a different view. Both the courts however observed that the revenue record was not produced in the case by either party. It is indeed surprising that in respect of the omission which came to the notice of the lower courts no steps were taken to have the deficiency removed. It was open to the trial court as well as to the first appellate court to send for the revenue record - gasht girdawari and 'roj-Namcha Waqiayat - to ascertain as to when and under what circumstances the fact of posses-ssion, if any, stood entered in them. Where the courts have to determine a question of possession entries in the revenue record namely annual registers, though not of a conclusive nature, yet it provide an evidence of a credible category unless circumstances justifying their rejection are brought 0n record. WE hold, therefore, that the enquiry is incomplete. WE, therefore, allow this revision, set aside the orders of the lower courts and remand the case to the court of the first instance with the direction that after affording an opportunity to the parties to bring the entries of the village revenue papers on record the case should be decided afresh in accordance with law. .