HARKU Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE petitioners have challenged in this petition the decree passed by the Trial Court in favour of the plaintiffs-respondents which was confirmed in the appeal by the R. A. A. and in second appeal by the Board of Revenue also as per the impugned orders at Annexs. 6, 7 and 8 respectively.

(3.) APART from this, there is thumping evidence in favour of the respondents including the compromise entered between the parties which was signed by none else than the defendant deceased Multana Ram-husband of the petitioner no. 1 on the question of possession. Above that, there was other documentary evidence in favour of the respondents and relying upon the oral as well as documentary evidence if the three courts below have passed decree in favour of the respondents then certainly, this Court will not interfere with such order in a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution.