GANGA RAM Vs. CHUNNI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal involves the decision of a question as to who is the owner of a particular land in suit. It appears that the respondent here, Chunni Lal, was sued by the appellant Ganga Ram in the revenue Court for ejectment. Ganga Ram's case was that he was the proprietor of the land and Chunni Lal held a grove, that Chunni Lal had out down the grove shortly before the institution of the suit and had thereby laid the land open to resumption by the zemindar. Chunni Lal's case was that he was the proprietor of the land. He was referred to the civil Court to obtain a declaration.

(2.) Chunni Lal's suit was dismissed by the Court of first instance, but has been decreed by the Court of first appeal. The learned Judge found that Chunni Lal's predecessors, Chatri and Ghanshiam, had purchased the land in suit from the proprietors, Hira Singh and Ajit Singh. He explained why, in spite of the purchase of the land, the purchasers were recorded as grove-holders in the papers and holding that the predecessors-in-title of Chunni Lal were owners of the land and not mere grove-holders, decreed the suit.

(3.) It appears that two ancient sale-deeds were adduced into evidence on behalf of Chunni Lal. These were rejected by the Court of first instance as not proved, but were admitted, on appeal, by the learned Judge who allowed the production before him of copies of khewats, which were public documents. It further appears that on one of the sale-deeds purporting to have been executed by Hira there is no mark or signature purporting to have been made either by Hira himself or somebody else on his behalf.