w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Rameshwar Prasad & Another v/s Harinarain & Others


Company & Directors' Information:- PRASAD CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U32301TN1994PTC028160

Company & Directors' Information:- PRASAD AND CO. PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U67120DL1995PTC068088

Company & Directors' Information:- M. PRASAD AND CO LIMITED [Active] CIN = U67120WB1999PLC090325

Company & Directors' Information:- H PRASAD & CO PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U51109WB1944PTC011797

    Civil Second Appeal No. 230 of 1984

    Decided On, 04 August 2011

    At, High Court of Rajasthan

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ

    For the Appellants: K.K. Chhawal, Counsel. For the Respondents: D.K. Dixit, Counsel.



Judgment Text

1. This is defendant's second appeal filed against judgment and decree dated 06.04.1984 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Dausa, whereby it confirmed judgment and decree dated 12.05.1978 of learned Munsiff, Dausa, who decreed the suit of plaintiffs and declared the sale-deed dated 11.01.1972, which was in favour of defendant no.1, as ineffective against plaintiff and further issued an injunction restraining defendants from interfering with possession and use of disputed property.

2. Seven plaintiffs, who were all sons and daughters of deceased Rampratap, filed aforesaid suit on 10.05.1972, inter-alia, with pleading that their father Rampratap had purchased a house situated in Mohallah Agarikawala of Laslot, from one Balabux, the father of defendants no.1 and 2 Jagdish Prasad and Rameshwar Prasad, by sale-deed dated 10.12.1942. When defendants no.1 and 2 pressurized the plaintiffs to resale the house to them, the plaintiffs denied. With a view to grabbing the house, those defendants behind the back of plaintiffs executed a sale-deed and got the same registered in favour of defendant no.3 Ramgopal on 11.01.1972. Defendant no.3 wanted to forcibly take possession of the house which was resisted by the plaintiff's family. Hence the suit was filed praying for aforesaid declaration and injunction.

3. Defendants filed a common written statement asserting therein that defendants no.1 and 2 were owner and title-holder of the disputed house. They have their own rights to sale the house to defendant no.3 and put him in possession thereof in accordance with the law. Defendant no.3 has every right to take possession, occupy and make use of the said property. Sale deed dated 11.01.1972 for consideration of Rs.1000/- was registered by defendants no.1 and 2 in favour of defendant no.3. It was prayed that the suit be dismissed.

4. Learned trial court framed as many as seven issues. Burden of proof of issues no.4, 5 and 6 was on defendants but their counsel did not press the same before trial court. For rest of the issues, burden of proof was on plaintiffs and those issues were decided in their favour. It was held that possession of disputed house was with plaintiffs and that this house was purchased by their father vide sale-deed dated 10.12.1942 (Exhibit-2) from father of defendants no.1 and 2. The sale-deed (Exhibit-2) is a document of more than 30 years old therefore presumption about its correctness under Section 90 of the Evidence Act was raised that it was executed in favour of Rampratap, father of plaintiffs, by Mathuralal and Balabux, fathers of defendants no.1 and 2. Sale consideration of the house was also duly passed on. Since sale consideration was only Rs.85/-, at the relevant time its registration was not necessary. However, execution was found proved. Learned trial court recorded its finding of possession against defendant no.3 though he claimed to be in possession, and in favour of plaintiffs. The appellate court affirmed those findings.

5. Learned counsel for appellants has argued that learned courts below have erred in law in raising a presumption about correctness in respect of both, the sale-deed dated 10.12.1942 (Exhibit-2) and receipt (Exhibit-3) merely because both happen to be thirty years old documents, under Section 90 of the Evidence Act. Basic requirements of law in this respect have been given a complete go by. Exhibit-3, the receipt, was forged one wherein date of execution is mentioned as Asoj Budhi Teej of Samvat 2023, which is corresponding to 02.10.1951, whereas the date 02.10.1951 had fallen on Asoj Sudhi Dooj of Samvat 2008 and Asoj Budhi Teej of Samvat 2023 fell on 02.10.1966. Stamp papers were purchased on 10.02.1950 and title is mentioned as receipt dated 10.02.1948, which has been overwritten to indicate 02.10.1951. The document is full of discrepancies and therefore could not be relied on. Both the courts below have erred in law in accepting such documents in evidence as genuine. If the later date of this document is taken into consideration, counting the date from the year 1972 when the suit was filed, the document cannot be considered to be of thirty years old and therefore presumption about its correctness was not correct. It is argued that sale-deed (Exhibit-2) would also meet the same fate. PW-1 Kailash Chand Sharma does not say anything about its being thirty years old. PW-2 Ramnath Mali also simply says that possession was with Harinarain and is being used for storing fodder and wood etc. on this land. The statements of these witnesses were absolutely vague and they do not say as to how they became owner. The impugned judgments suffer from infirmity calling for interference by this Court. The judgments be therefore set aside and the suit filed by the plaintiffs be dismissed.

6. This court while admitting the appeal vide its order dated 06.09.1988, framed following substantial question of law for consideration:-

"Whether the courts below were right in drawing presumption in respect of documents Ex.2 and Ex.3 even though the said documents on the face of it appear to be fabricated."

7. Learned counsel for respondents has opposed the appeal and submitted that documents, namely, sale-deed (Exhibit-2) and receipt (Exhibit-3) were very old documents and they cannot be said to be false and fabricated. Documents were produced from genuine custody and they were thirty years old at the time they were produced. Learned trial court was wholly justified in raising presumption about their correctness. Learned counsel submitted that in so far as sale-deed (Exhibit-2) is concerned, the defendant-appellants themselves have not alleged any discrepancy therein. Regarding the receipt (Exhibit-3) allegation of discrepancy is hardly believable. The document is genuine. This document has been found to be proved as genuine by both the courts below. This is a finding of fact which is not open to interference under Section 100 of the CPC. Learned counsel has taken the court through those documents available on record to bring home his argument. It was prayed that the appeal be dismissed.

8. I have given my anxious and thoughtful consideration to rival submissions and perused the material on record.

9. It is not in dispute that the documents, which have been relied on by learned trial court to decree the suit in favour of plaintiffs, pertain to the disputed house. There is no serious contest abut any discrepancy in so far as sale-deed (Exhibit-2) is concerned. However regarding the receipt (Exhibit-3), allegation of discrepancy is hardly believable. The document is genuine. This document has been found to be proved as genuine by both the courts below.

10. Question whether or not those documents are genuine or not, but since a presumption has been raised about said documents with reference to Section 90 of the Evidence Act, I have carefully examined those documents. This is a receipt of Rs.35/- prepared with reference to the total sale consideration of the house i.e. Rs.85/-. The apparent examination of the document does not show any discrepancy about the dates of its execution and year of English calendar vis-a-vis the Vikram Samvat. This was prepared in continuation of earlier deed of transfer. This was duly executed on 10.02.1950. The sale-deed (Exhibit-2) was executed on 10.12.1942 on which the possession was taken. The stamp paper of (Exhibit-2) contains the date, Bhadwa Sudi Teej of Samvat 1996, which is corresponding to year 1939. There was nothing irregular

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

in execution of the sale-deed by use of such a stamp paper on 10.12.1942. For subsequent receipt, which is said to have prepared on Asoj Budhi Teej of Samvat 2023 which is corresponding to 02.10.1951. The sale-deed was executed on 02.10.1951. Minor discrepancy in regard to date given does not make a document inadmissible in evidence because otherwise also this document has been prepared on a stamp paper of the time issued on Bhadwa Sudi Teej of Samvat 2003 and is apparently a more than thirty years old document. Correctness of the date indicated therein is a question of fact and not a question of law and therefore I do not find any infirmity in either of two judgments. 11. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in this appeal and same is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

13-05-2020 Shiv Prasad Singh Versus Nageshwar Kumar & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
13-05-2020 Kumar Bimal Prasad Singh & Others Versus Hare Ram Singh & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
11-05-2020 Sreeja Prasad Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
08-05-2020 Ram Prasad Nayak Versus State of Chhattisgarh High Court of Chhattisgarh
22-04-2020 Chebrolu Leela Prasad Rao & Others Versus State of A.P. & Others Supreme Court of India
10-04-2020 Ayodhya Prasad Mishra Versus State of U.P. High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad Lucknow Bench
19-03-2020 Ram Chandra Prasad Singh Versus Sharad Yadav Supreme Court of India
18-03-2020 Ex-Gunner Virender Prasad Versus Union of India & Another Supreme Court of India
18-03-2020 Shambhu Prasad Sharma Advocate Versus Renu Jogi High Court of Chhattisgarh
13-03-2020 Sankar Prasad Bose & Another Versus M/s. Shitala Construction Rep. by Ajit Panja & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
11-03-2020 Jyothi Prasad Versus K.V. Prakasan & Another High Court of Kerala
02-03-2020 Badri Prasad Mishra Versus Moti Singh High Court of Chhattisgarh
19-02-2020 Union of India & Others Versus Ashes Kiran Prasad High Court of Delhi
18-02-2020 Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited A Government of India Enterprises, Delhi & Others Versus Gopal Prasad Jaiswal High Court of Chhattisgarh
18-02-2020 Jagdish Prasad Vijay Versus Niti Aaayog, Erstwhile, Planning Commission Through The Dy. Chairman, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
14-02-2020 Santosh Prasad @ Santosh Kumar Versus The State of Bihar Supreme Court of India
14-02-2020 Mathura Prasad Tripathi Versus State of M.P. & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh
14-02-2020 Woodland Manufacturers Limited Versus Sankar Prasad Garga & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
11-02-2020 Matawar Prasad Versus District Judge Shravasti & Others High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad Lucknow Bench
10-02-2020 Raj Kumar Prasad & Others Versus Som Datt Medical Centre & Others Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission New Delhi
10-02-2020 Rajender Prasad Aggarwal & Others Versus Union of India & Others High Court of Punjab and Haryana
07-02-2020 Ram Prasad Versus Commissioner & Others High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
31-01-2020 Govind Prasad Kejriwal Versus State of Bihar & Another Supreme Court of India
28-01-2020 Chandeshwar Saw Versus Brij Bhushan Prasad & Others Supreme Court of India
27-01-2020 Ramnarayan Versus & Another Geeta Prasad & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
24-01-2020 M/s. C.C.L. Products (India) Ltd., Rep., by its Executive Chairman, Challarajendra Prasad & Others Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by its Public Prosecutor & Another High Court of Andhra Pradesh
22-01-2020 Nanakram & Another Versus Jamuna Prasad High Court of Madhya Pradesh
21-01-2020 Sant Prasad Seth Versus State of U.P. & Others High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
20-01-2020 K.N. Prasad Versus P.R. Gigi & Another High Court of Kerala
17-01-2020 Rajinder Prasad Aggarwal Versus Dr. Anil Kumar Narang High Court of Delhi
16-01-2020 Bhola Prasad Shukla & Others Versus Union of India & Others Supreme Court of India
16-01-2020 Prita Prasad & Another Versus Md. Khalil & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
13-01-2020 The Sada Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., through its General Manager, Pratosh R. Lotlikar Versus Prasad U. Parab & Another In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
10-01-2020 Sankath Prasad Versus State of Uttar Pradesh Supreme Court of India
08-01-2020 Baiju Prasad Gupta Versus State of Bihar & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
07-01-2020 For the Petitioners: Anjani Kumar, Sr. Advocate, Sanjay Prasad, Advocate. For the Respondents: ----------- High Court of Judicature at Patna
06-01-2020 Dr. N. Rajendra Prasad & Others Versus Lingampally Srinivas & Others Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Hyderabad
03-01-2020 Prasad Brahmin Versus State of Rajasthan & Others High Court of Rajasthan Jaipur Bench
02-01-2020 In The Matter Of: P. Prasad & Others Versus Union of India & Others National Green Tribunal Southern Zone Chennai
02-01-2020 Sohan Prasad Choudhary Versus State of West Bengal & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
20-12-2019 Sangeeta Singh Versus Ravi Ranjan Prasad Singh High Court of Punjab and Haryana
20-12-2019 R. Ashmita Versus Narendra Prasad Jaiswal & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
19-12-2019 Kishor Baburao Wadaskar Prasad Versus The Collector, Collectorate Office at Chandrapur, Tah. & Dist. & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
13-12-2019 Bhubneshwar Prasad Katnala Versus Chief of the Naval Staff Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission New Delhi
12-12-2019 Mecon Limited Versus Sri Buddha Prasad Pal & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
12-12-2019 Sangam Prasad Mishra & Another Versus State of U.P.Throu.Secy.Karmik Lucknow & Others High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
06-12-2019 Dharmendra Prasad & Others Versus Sunil Kumar & Others Supreme Court of India
04-12-2019 Koganti Venkata Siva Ramesh Prasad Versus Gogineni Sailaja High Court of Andhra Pradesh
04-12-2019 M/s. Hindustan Steel Works Construction Limited, Rep. by its General Manager, V.S. Prasad Versus Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Project Director, Tamil Nadu Road Sector Project, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
02-12-2019 Purbanchaliya Rail Karmi Parishad, Represented by its General Secretary, Bindeswari Prasad, having its Registered Office at Maligaon Versus The Union of India, Represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Railways, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
22-11-2019 M.N. Prasad & Another Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala & Others High Court of Kerala
21-11-2019 Gautam Prasad Shaw & Another Versus M/s. Master Plan & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
21-11-2019 M/s. Prasad Productions Pvt. Ltd., Represented by its Authorised Signatory, Chennai Versus Prakash Raj, Proprietor, Carrying on business under the name and style of M/s. Prakash Raj Productions at No.21/9, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
08-11-2019 Gouri Prasad Goenka Ex-Chairman of NRC Limited Versus Punjab National Bank National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
07-11-2019 S.V. Mathav Prasad Versus Apollo Surgical Instrument Co., Rep. by its Partners Sudir Batra & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
05-11-2019 Subhash Arora Versus Prasad Process Pvt. Ltd. High Court of Delhi
04-11-2019 B. Prasad Versus Suchithra Vijayan & Another High Court of Kerala
02-11-2019 Rajendra Prasad Versus Sikkim University & Others High Court of Sikkim
25-10-2019 K. Rajendra Prasad & Others Versus State of Andhra Pradesh & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh
21-10-2019 Samaresh Prasad Chowdhury Versus UCO Bank & Others Supreme Court of India
21-10-2019 Manoj Prasad Verma Versus Neesu Construction Pvt. Ltd. & Others Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission New Delhi
17-10-2019 A.A. Prasad Versus State of Kerala Represented by Secretary, Department of Agriculture Development & Farmers Welfare, Thiruvananthapuram High Court of Kerala
16-10-2019 Mahavir Prasad Agrawal Versus Indian Oil Corporation Limited Registered Office At Yavar Jung Marg, Mumbai & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
15-10-2019 Rajasthan Housing Board & Another Versus Gururaj Prasad Sharma National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
11-10-2019 Vijay Kumar Prasad Versus Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd., through Shahi Shanker, CMD ONGC, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
01-10-2019 N. Shankar Prasad Versus State of Andhra Pradesh High Court of Andhra Pradesh
27-09-2019 Arjun Prasad Dubey Versus President, Priyadarshini Grih Nirman & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
26-09-2019 Krishna Prasad Verma (D) Through. LRS. Versus State of Bihar & Others Supreme Court of India
26-09-2019 Krishna Prasad Verma (D) Thr. Lrs. Versus State of Bihar & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
25-09-2019 S.V. Matha Prasad Versus Gururajan Shyank Territorial Manager-Retail Representative of M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, A Government of India Undertaking Ranganathan Garden, Anna Nagar, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-09-2019 Umesh Prasad Versus The State (Govt of Nct of Delhi) & Another High Court of Delhi
24-09-2019 M/s. Shin Ho Petrochemical (India) Ltd., Rep. by its Manager (Legal) A.Babu Prasad, Chennai Versus Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Commerce, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-09-2019 Shailendra Prasad Badoni Versus Zeestar Multi Club & Tours Pvt. Ltd. & Others SEBI Securities amp Exchange Board of India Securities Appellate Tribunal
24-09-2019 Sri Ananta Prasad Sahu @ Sri Ananta Lal Sahu Versus Sri Gopal Sahu @ Sri Golao Lal Sahu High Court of Gauhati
20-09-2019 International Society for Krishna Consciousness Versus Ishwari Prasad Singh Roy & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
16-09-2019 For the Appellant: Brijesh Sahai, Chandra Bhushan Prasad, Nirvikar Gupta, Pradeep Kumar Chaurasia, Rajesh Pratap Singh, Advocates. For the Respondent: Govt. Advocate. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
13-09-2019 Arvind Aggarwal Versus Jagwat Prasad High Court of Delhi
13-09-2019 M/s. Nissan Motors, Corporate Office, ASV Ramana Towers, Chennai & Others Versus S. Giri Prasad High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-09-2019 Sapthagiri Residents Welfare Association Rep. By Its Sercretary. B. Chandrasekhara Reddy Versus M/s. Sri Constructions, By Its Managing Partnr G Prasad & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
30-08-2019 M. Prasad Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary to Government, Home (Courts-A) Law Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh
21-08-2019 Manohar Daulatram Ghansharamani Versus Janardhan Prasad Chaturvedi & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
20-08-2019 Prabhat Kumar Prasad & Another Versus Bengal Shristi Infrastructure Development Ltd. & Another West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
20-08-2019 Gaya Prasad Tiwari Versus Allahabad Development Authority High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
16-08-2019 Surendra Prasad Mishra Versus Ramawati & Others Supreme Court of India
14-08-2019 State of Jharkhand & Others Versus Gopal Prasad Mandal Supreme Court of India
09-08-2019 Gopal Prasad Singh Versus State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
09-08-2019 Bathula Rajeshwari & Others Versus B. Prasad Rao & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
08-08-2019 Laxman Prasad Versus Dharamlal & Another High Court of Chhattisgarh
02-08-2019 M. Narasimha Prasad Versus The Registrar General High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore & Another High Court of Karnataka
01-08-2019 Shashi Bhusan Prasad Versus Inspector General Central Industrial Security Force & Others Supreme Court of India
22-07-2019 Manik Lal Prasad Versus State of Bihar & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
22-07-2019 Rajendra Prasad Sharma Versus M/s. Hartin Harris Ltd. High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
19-07-2019 K.M. Prasad Versus State by Assistant Commissioner of Police, Devaraja Division, Benglauru & Another High Court of Karnataka
18-07-2019 Sujan Bhabani Prasad Chatterjee & Another Versus Rajendra Kumar Singh & Another High Court of Judicature at Bombay
17-07-2019 Ramjee Prasad Versus State of Bihar & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
16-07-2019 State of U.P. Thru Collector Allahabad Versus Haushala Prasad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
09-07-2019 Nitya Nand Prasad Gupta Versus The State of Bihar through the Pinki Pal, Secretary, Department of Housing & Urban Development & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
08-07-2019 C. Rajendra Prasad Versus The Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority, Rep. by its Member Secretary, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
08-07-2019 Ranjan Prasad Srivastava Versus State of Bihar & Others High Court of Gauhati
05-07-2019 Beeram Guru Prasad Versus M/s. Margadrasi Chit Fund Pvt.Ltd. & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh


LawyerServices is a Premium Legal Tech solution.


Lawyers, Law Firms, Government Departments and Corporates rely on us for, Workflow Automation, Data Aggregation, Timely Updates, Case Management, Intelligent Research, Latest Legal Data Updates and a LOT more!

If you are a legal professional, CONTACT US, in order to see how our UNIQUE solution can benefit your organization.

Features Intro Close Box