RAM KANYA BAI Vs. LATTUR LAL AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Suit for rent and eviction filed by the plaintiff -appellant was dismissed by the trial court vide judgment and decree dated 24.8.2006. The above judgment and decree passed by the trial court has further been affirmed by the lower appellate court vide judgment dated 5.3.2008. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, I have carefully gone through the material on record.

(2.) The suit has been dismissed mainly on the ground of no evidence. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the plaintiff had recorded her statement and proved certain documents, as such, may be evidence was not complete for want of further cross -examination, however, whatever statement already made could not have been ignored by the trial court as also lower appellate court. In my opinion, submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant is wholly misconceived and untenable. Admittedly, cross -examination had been deferred for want of original documents, but inspite of repeated opportunities given, the plaintiff neither produced herself for further cross -examination nor, any other witness was produced. Even if some original document also available on record but not admitted by the other side, such documents have to be proved either by the plaintiff or any other witness and other side has a right to cross -examine the witness on such documents. Under the circumstances, the incomplete statement made by the plaintiff under the law could not have been taken into consideration. On the basis of concurrent findings of facts since after due consideration proper discretion has already been used by both the courts below, in the facts and circumstances, no further interference is called for by this court, moreso, when no substantial question of law arises. The appeal is dismissed accordingly as having no merits.