Full Judgment
1. Prabhu Yadav son of late Ram Lal Yadav.
2. Dilip Yadav 3. Karu Yadav 4. Bachu Yadav, all sons of Prabhu Yadav, residents of village-Bariyarpur, P.O. Nayadih, P.S. Sono, District- Jamui. ....Plaintiffs/Respondents/Appellants Versus 1. Manki Devi wife of late Baldeo Yadav.
2. Doman Yadav 3. Parmeshwar Yadav 4. Jata Yadav(Minor), all sons of late Baldeo Yadav, resident of Mauza Nayadih, P.S.-Sono, District-Jamui. ....Defendants/ Appellants/Respondents ============================================ Appearance : For the Appellants : Mrs. Poonam Singh, Advocate For the Respondents : ================================================== 03. 12.01.2012 Heard Mrs. Poonam Singh learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants in support of this appeal. The appellants in this appeal were the defendants in the suit and are aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the appellate court below reversing the judgment and decree of the trial court.
2. The plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration of his title over the suit land and also for recovery of 2 possession. It was the case of the plaintiffs that they had been dispossessed after the order passed in a proceeding under Section 145 Cr.P.C. in the year 1978. The plaintiffs have based their claim of title on the sale deed dated 09.07.1951 which is claimed to have been executed by Sahodari Devi wife of Dudo Yadav. The defendants resisted the claim of the plaintiffs, assailing the validity of the sale deed and alleged the same to be forged and fabricated document.
3. There is no dispute between the parties that Chowa Gope was the original owner of the suit land and had a son Khagpat Yadav whose wife was Sahodri Devi and his son Baldeo Yadav is the defendant in this suit. It is the case of the plaintiff that Khagpat Yadav earlier had executed a sale deed with regard to 26 decimal of his property which he had inherited from Chowa Gope and further the plaintiffs has stated that after the death of Khagpat Yadav, his widow Sahodri Devi for herself and her minor son Baldeo Yadav had executed the sale deed dated 09.07.1951 in favour of the plaintiff.
4. The sale deed dated 09.07.1951, which is the basis of the claim of the plaintiffs, has been 3 admittedly executed by Sahodari Devi but her husbands name in the same has been mentioned as Dudo Yadav. It is the case of the defendant who is son of Khagpat Yadav that his father Khagpat Yadav had no alias name as Dudo Yadav and the sale deed executed by Sahodari Devi as widow of Dudo Yadav, had not been executed his mother Sahodari Devi and is a forged and fabricated document. The trial court, after examining the evidence of the parties, has come to the finding that Khagpat Yadav had an alias name Dudo Yadav and the sale deed had been validly executed by Sahodri Devi as widow of Dudo Yadav and on the basis of its findings, the trial court decreed the suit. However, in appeal by the defendant, the appellate court on reappraisal of the evidence in view rival submissions of the parties, has come to the conclusion that the plaintiffs have failed to establish that Khagpat Yadav had an alias name Dudo Yadav. The appellate court below has also taken into consideration the reliance placed by the trial court on MURDA KA HATH CHITTA (Ext.-4) and found the same to be not admissible in evidence. The appellate court below has also taken notice of the fact that the trial 4 court has placed reliance upon the disputed sale deed in question itself for coming to the finding that Khagpat Yadav had an alias name Dudo Yadav and found the same to be not the correct approach. The appellate court below has also taken notice of the fact that the plaintiffs, even after getting the sale deed in the year 1951, did not get their names mutated on that basis which fact could have shown that the disputed sale deed was acted upon. Thus, the appellate court below, in view of its findings, has concluded that the disputed sale deed was not executed by Sahodari Devi, mother of the defendant and allowed the appeal.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has very strenuously submitted that the appellate court below has committed error in law in ignoring the material evidence on record and misappreciating the relevant evidence. It has been urged that in view of Section 90 of the Evidence Act, the sale deed dated 09.07.1951 should have been accepted to be a valid document and it ought to have been held that the plaintiffs have acquired valid title over the suit land on the basis of that sale deed. It has also been contended 5 that the trial court has given valid reasons for recording the findings in favour of the plaintiffs but the appellate court below has not considered those reasonings before reversing the judgment of the trial court.
6. After perusing the impugned judgment and considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant, it is pellucid that the dispute between the parties is whether Khagpat Yadav, the father of the defendant Baldeo Yadav had the alias name as Dudo Yadav. The appellate court below, being the trial of court of fact, has come to the finding that Khagpat Yadav had no alias name as Dudo Yadav. The presumption under Section 90 of the Evidence Act is confined to the signature of the executant and due execution and attestation of a document which is 30 years old and is produced from proper custody, but it does not provide that a document 30 years old will also be presumed to be a genuine document legally valid in all respects for transferring title over immovable property. The legal validity of such document is still to be examined by a court and a defendant cannot be precluded from establishing before the court that such 6 document is not a legally valid document and is the result of forgery and fabrication. The appellate court below has recorded the finding of fact on the basis of evidence and nothing could be shown that such findings are perverse. The issues arising between the parties are concluded by the finding of fact.
7. No substantial question of law arises for consideration in this second appeal, which is accordingly dismissed ( V.Nath, J.) Devendra/