GANGA RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the appellants and having examined the material placed on record, we are unable to find any reason to consider interference in the order dated 21.12.2011 whereby the learned Single Judge of this Court dismissed the writ petition (CWP No. 11887/2011 : Ganga Ram & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) as filed by the petitioners- appellants after finding no case for interference in the concurrent findings on the facts as recorded by the three subordinate Revenue Courts.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the law remains settled that the ocular evidence could also form the basis of declaration of khatedari rights and the claim of the appellants cannot be declined merely for being based on ocular evidence. However, the argument remains bereft of substance for the reason that the subordinate Courts have considered the entire record and thereafter found that the claim of the petitioners- appellants of the khatedari rights over the land in question was contradicted by the documentary evidence. THE Courts even found the very fundamental facts as asserted by the petitioners-appellants about their relationship with the other person in possession namely, Mamraj son of Bhomaram, as nephew-uncle to be not proved.